THE  LIBRARIES 


THE   CHUECH 

IN    THE 

CONFEDERATE  STATES 


THE  CHURCH 

IN  THE 

CONFEDERATE    STATES 


A  HISTORY  OF  THE  PROTESTANT 

EPISCOPAL  CHURCH   IN  THE 

CONFEDERATE  STATES 


BY 

JOSEPH  BLOUNT  CHESHIRE,  D.D. 

BISHOP    OF    NORTH    CAROLINA 


LONGMANS,    GREEN,   AND    CO. 

FOURTH  AVIK'JE  ^  SOTK  ST^ElEl    N.^.W  YORK 
LONDON,    BOMBAY,    AND    CALCUTTA 

,       1912 


^  '^7.  7,^ 


i-'^-hS 


COPYRIGHT,   1911,   BY 
JOSEPH    BLOUNT    CHESHIRE 


All  Rights  Reserved 


NORWOOD  •  MASS  •  U  •  S  •  A 


TO    THE    LIVING    AND    THE    DEAD: 
AND    ESPECIALLY 

TO 

THE    MEMORY    OF 

ALFRED    AUGUSTINE    WATSON,    D.  D. 

LATE    BISHOP    OF    EAST    CAROLINA, 

SOMETIME    CHAPLAIN    OF 

THE    SECOND    N.    C.    REGIMENT,    C.  S.  A. 

AND    OF 

FRANCIS  MARION  PARKER, 

LATE  COLONEL  OF 

THE  THIRTIETH  N.  C.  REGIMENT,  C.S.A. 

AND  TO 

EDWIN    AUGUSTUS    OSBORNE, 

ARCHDEACON    OF    CHARLOTTE, 

SOMETIME    COLONEL    OF 

THE    FOURTH    N.    C.    REGIMENT,    C.S.A. 

THIS    VOLUME    IS    REVERENTLY    AND 

AFFECTIONATELY    DEDICATED 


PREFACE 

I  VENTURE  to  call  the  following  papers  a  History, 
because  I  believe  that  they  give,  with  sufficient  fullness 
for  the  ordinary  reader,  the  story  of  the  Church  in  the 
South,  from  1861  to  1866,  in  all  matters  affecting  its 
general  interests  as  distinguished  from  local  and 
diocesan  details,  with  some  account  of  its  work  and 
inner  spirit,  as  they  are  related  to  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances of  the  time  and  the  situation. 

The  first  three  were  written  and  delivered  at  the 
request  of  the  Faculty  of  the  Theological  Seminary 
at  Alexandria,  as  ''Reinicker  Lectures''  for  1910.  The 
others,  with  one  exception,  have  been  delivered  at 
one  or  other  of  the  Theological  Schools  at  Middle- 
town,  Cambridge,  Philadelphia,  Sewanee,  and  the  Gen- 
eral Theological  Seminary  in  New  York.  They  are 
published  substantially  as  they  were  delivered,  with 
the  addition  of  a  few  notes  and  tables  of  dates  printed 
separate  from  the  body  of  the  text. 

The  writer  believes  that  he  should  not  have  ventured 
upon  this  work  but  for  the  invitation  of  the  Alexan- 
dria Faculty  above  referred  to.  But  having  become 
interested  in  the  subject,  and  finding,  from  a  somewhat 
extended  correspondence  with  both  clergymen  and 
laymen,  that  so  little  was  remembered  or  knowTi  of 
the  history  of  the  Church  in  the  South  during  those 


Vm  PREFACE 

eventful  and  trying  days,  and  also  being  encouraged 
by  many  evidences  and  expressions  of  interest  in  the 
subject,  he  went  on  until  the  most  valuable  parts  of 
the  material  gathered  grew  into  the  form  in  which 
these  papers  are  now  given  to  the  press.  It  has  been 
more  by  providential  leading,  if  so  serious  a  term  may 
be  employed,  that  these  papers  have  been  written  and 
published,  than  by  any  premeditated  purpose  on  the 
part  of  the  writer  to  obtrude  himself  upon  publisher 
or  readers.  As,  however,  during  the  forty-six  years 
which  have  passed  since  the  close  of  the  War  between 
the  States,  no  better  hand  has  undertaken  to  trace 
the  story  here  told;  it  is  hoped  that  this  attempt  may 
prove  of  some  interest  and  value  to  those  who  iove 
the  Church  of  our  fathers  and  our  forefathers. 

It  has  seemed  not  inappropriate  to  add  a  brief 
study  of  the  life  and  character  of  Bishop  Atkinson, 
who  bore  so  important  a  relation  to  the  Church  in 
the  Confederate  States. 

Of  the  deficiencies  and  inadequacy  of  the  work 
hardly  any  one  can  be  so  conscious  as  the  writer,  who 
yet  ventures  to  submit  it  to  the  public. 

J.  B.  C. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER 

I.    The    Secession    of    the    States  .... 
Its  Effect  upon  the  Dioceses 
The  Meeting  at  Montgomery,  July  3, 1861 
II.    The  Meeting  at  Columbia,  October  16,  1861 
The  Case  of  Bishop  Polk  .... 
The  Consecration  of  Bishop  Wilmer 
The    "General   Council"    of    November 

12,  1862 

in.    Church  Work  in  the  Army    . 

Some  Confederate  Chaplains  . 

Religious  Reading  for  the  Soldiers 

"The  Church  Intelligencer" 

The  Confederate  Prayer  Book    . 

IV.    The  Church  and  the  Negro  . 

V.   The  Spirit  of  the  Church,  and  its  Burdens 

VI.    Some   of   the   Trials  and   Tribulations  of 

THE  Times    

Bishop  Wilmer's  Troubles  in  1865 
VII.   Peace,  and  the  Reunion  of  the  Dioceses  . 


Bishop  Atkinson   and   the   Church   in   the 

Confederacy  

Index 


PAGE 
3 

19 
35 
39 
46 
49 

54 
69 
83 
91 
94 
98 
106 
135 

167 
184 
202 


257 

283 


THE   PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH 
IN  THE   CONFEDERATE   STATES 


THE 
PROTESTANT  EPlSCOrAL  CHURCH 

IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES 
I 

THE  SECESSION  OF  THE  STATES;    ITS  EFFECT  UPON 

THE  DIOCESES;  THE  MEETING  AT  MONTGOMERY, 

JULY  3,  1861 

Bishop  Gregg,  of  Texas,  makes  a  very  suggestive 
observation  in  his  Address  to  his  Convention  of  1862. 
He  says:  "It  is  one  of  the  happy  effects  of  revolu- 
tions, ecclesiastical  and  civil,  if  rightly  conducted,  to 
develop  more  fully  principles  that  had  long  lain  dor- 
mant, to  evolve  truth  long  obscured,  and  alike  to 
expose,  if  not  always  to  correct,  the  evils  of  error  and 
corruption."  The  justice  of  this  statement  is,  I  think, 
illustrated  by  the  history  of  our  American  Church  in 
that  momentous  period  lying  between  the  years  1860 
and  1866. 

The  admirable  monograph  upon  the  "Church  in 
the  Confederate  States,"  by  the  late  learned  and 
judicious  Dr.  John  Fulton,  in  the  second  volume  of 
Bishop  Perry's  *'  History  of  the  American  Episcopal 
Church,"  so  fully  and  adequately  summarizes  the 
constitutional  history  of  that  period,  that  it  leaves 
little  to  be  desired  by  one  who  wishes  to  have  a  clear 
and  compendious  statement  of  the  principles  involved, 
and  of  the  way  in  which  those  principles  were  worked 

3 


4  THECHURCH 

out  in  the  thought  and  action  of  our  fathers  and 
predecessors  in  the  Church.  It  will,  however,  be 
found  a  not  unprofitable  study  if  we  look  a  little  more 
closely  into  the  particular  events  of  that  momentous 
period,  and  examine  more  attentively  and  in  more 
detail  the  currents  and  eddies  of  that  great  stream 
down  whose  perilous  flood  they  were  swept. 

In  considering  the  action  of  the  several  Dioceses 
of  the  South  under  the  influence  of  the  most  profound 
and  universal  movement  of  public  feeling  ever  aroused 
in  the  hearts  of  our  people,  it  should  be  remembered 
that  the  Church  in  the  South  was  numerically  ex- 
tremely weak.  In  Virginia  and  the  Carolinas  its 
historic  position  and  its  influence  in  the  development 
of  those  States  gave  it  a  position  of  importance;  and 
in  all  the  Southern  States  the  character,  social  ante- 
cedents, intelligence,  and  wealth  of  its  members 
assured  it  of  public  consideration  far  out  of  proportion 
to  its  numerical  strength.  It  may  also  be  said  that 
in  Virginia  and  the  Carolinas  there  were  very  consider- 
able numbers  identified  with  the  Church,  though  not 
great  in  comparison  with  the  total  population.  But 
in  the  Dioceses  to  the  south  of  these  there  were  in 
1859  only  one  hundred  and  seventy -five  clergymen  in 
all,  and  less  than  ten  thousand  communicants.  Not 
only  was  the  Church  weak  in  all  those  more  Southern 
States,  but  as  an  organization  it  was  new  and  but 
little  known.  In  1859  only  one  of  those  Dioceses 
was  as  much  as  thirty  years  old;  and  in  every  one 
of  them  the  first  Bishop  the  Diocese  had  known  was 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        5 

still  its  Diocesan.  Georgia  had  some  slight  connection 
with  early  Church  life  and  history,  and  cherished 
interesting  traditions  of  the  two  Wesleys  and  George 
Whitefield,  and  of  their  work  in  Savannah;  but  south 
and  west  of  the  small  remnant  of  the  Georgia  Colonial 
Church  our  organization  was,  as  to  local  develop- 
ment, but  of  yesterday.  Virginia  and  the  Carolinas, 
and  Maryland  to  a  more  limited  extent,  had  been 
pouring  emigrants  into  the  South  and  Southwest,  into 
Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  Texas, 
Tennessee,  and  Arkansas,  as  during  the  same  period 
New  England  and  the  Middle  States  had  populated 
the  upper  Mississippi  valley  and  the  regions  beyond. 
And  where  Virginia  and  Carolina  Churchmen  settled 
in  the  South  and  Southwest  gradually  little  congrega- 
tions and  parishes  were  formed.  In  1834  Bishop 
Otey  was  consecrated  for  Tennessee;  in  1841  Bishop 
Polk  resigned  his  immense  missionary  field  to  become 
Bishop  of  the  new  Diocese  of  Louisiana;  and  in  the 
same  year  Bishop  Elliott  was  consecrated  the  first 
Bishop  of  Georgia.  Then  came  Bishop  Cobbs  for 
Alabama  in  1844,  Bishop  Green  for  Mississippi  in 
1850,  Bishop  Rutledge  for  Florida  in  1851,  and  Bishop 
Gregg  for  Texas,  and  Bishop  Lay  for  Arkansas,  in 
1859.  Thus  the  Church  throughout  the  South  had 
barely  been  organized  and  equipped  with  its  proper 
diocesan  appliances,  when  the  whole  country  began 
to  be  disturbed  by  the  unmistakable  signs  of  a  coming 
convulsion. 

The  General  Convention  of  1859,  held  in  the  City 


6  THECHURCH 

of  Richmond,  was  felt  to  be  one  of  specially  happy 
significance  for  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  The 
gracious  hospitality  of  the  people  of  that  city  warmed 
all  hearts;  Churchmen  from  adjoining  States  in  un- 
wonted numbers  attended  its  sessions;  important 
canonical  legislation,  pending  for  years,  was  brought 
to  a  successful  conclusion;  and  the  Consecration  of 
five  Bishops,!  three  of  them  for  new  Sees  upon  our 
missionary  frontier,  and  all  of  them  men  giving  sure 
promise  of  that  eminent  usefulness  which  marked  their 
episcopal  labors,  crowned  the  work  of  the  Conven- 
tion with  an  unprecedented  evidence  of  the  growth 
and  prosperity  of  the  great  national  Church  which  it 
represented.  And  who  shall  say  that  the  Christian 
love  and  sympathy,  manifested  and  developed  at  the 
General  Convention  of  1859,  was  not  part  of  the  prepa- 
ration to  enable  the  Church  to  endure  the  sad  trials 
so  soon  to  come? 

They  were  a  notable  body  of  men  who  at  that  time 
presided  over  the  Southern  Dioceses.  Some  of  them 
were,  at  one  time  or  another  during  their  lives,  involved 
in  controversies  and  contentions  of  a  most  trying 
character.  They  were  as  a  rule  strong  and  assertive 
in  their  nature,  and  encountered,  and  perhaps  some- 
times they  aroused,  very  determined  opposition.  But 
I  believe  no  man  then,  and  no  man  now,  could  fail  to 
recognize  their  purity,  elevation  of  character,  and 
essential  saintliness.  One  does  not  justly  incur  the 
censure  of  being  ''laudator  temporis  acti  "  by  saying 
*  Bishops  Gregg,  Odenheimer,  Bedell,  WTiipple,  and  Lay. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES         7 

that  Bishops  Meade,  Atkinson,  Elliott,  Cohbs,  Otey, 
and  Polk  were  men  cast  in  a  larger  mould  than  the 
common.  And  the  other  Southern  Bishops,  Johns, 
Davis,  Rutledge,  Green,  Gregg,  and  Lay,  were  worthy 
associates  and  fellows  of  those  eminent  men.  With 
the  exception  of  Bishop  Johns  they  were  all  Southern 
men,  of  Southern  birth  and  ancestry;  from  different 
regions  of  the  South,  though  all  natives  of  Virginia 
and  the  Carolinas;  in  their  birth  and  training  repre- 
senting different  phases  of  Southern  life,  the  wealthy 
planter,  the  plain  farmer  of  the  piedmont  section,  the 
cultivated  professional  man  of  the  Southern  city; 
but  all  distinctly  of  the  South  in  moral  and  intellectual 
fibre,  in  social  habits  and  prejudices.  For  the  most 
part  their  education  had  been  in  and  of  the  South. 
Bishop  Meade  and  Bishop  Johns  were,  I  believe, 
graduates  of  Princeton,  and  Bishop  Rutledge  of  Yale. 
Bishop  Atkinson  was  of  Hampden-Sidney,  Bishop  Lay 
of  the  University  of  Virginia,  Bishops  Elliott  and 
Gregg  of  South  Carolina  College,  and  Bishops  Otey, 
Green,  and  Davis,  of  the  University  of  North  Carolina, 
in  which  Bishop  Polk  also  had  been  a  student  before 
entering  the  Military  Academy  at  West  Point.  Bishop 
Cobbs  was  without  academic  training  in  early  youth, 
but  had  worked  out  his  own  intellectual  development 
in  the  laborious  calling  of  a  country  school-teacher  in 
the  up-country  of  Virginia. 

Their  attitude  towards  the  questions  then  dividing 
public  sentiment,  slavery  and  the  right  of  a  State  to 
secede  from  the  Union,  was  fairly  representative  of 


8  THECHURCH 

that  of  the  South  in  general  in  its  different  phases. 
There  were  among  them  strong  advocates  of  the  right 
of  secession.  But  there  were  also  among  them,  as 
there  were  throughout  the  South,  and  especially  in 
Virginia  and  in  North  Carolina,  those  who  would  have 
been  glad  to  see  some  just  and  safe  scheme  of  emancipa- 
tion devised,  and  who  were  intensely  opposed  in  senti- 
ment to  any  suggestion  of  disunion.  But,  as  a  rule, 
these  men  believed  that  it  belonged  to  the  States  alone, 
each  acting  for  itself,  to  deal  with  the  question  of 
slavery;  and  that  the  armed  coercion  of  a  State,  to 
retain  it  within  the  Union,  was  as  plain  a  violation  of 
the  spirit  of  the  constitutional  compact  as  was  the 
act  of  the  State  in  withdrawing  from  the  Union. 
Unquestionably  such  was  the  earnest  conviction  of 
the  great  body  of  those  who  in  the  South  were  called 
''Union  Men"  in  1860. 

It  is  the  happy  memory  and  the  justified  boast  of 
American  Churchmen,  both  North  and  South,  that 
the  Church  which  we  love  had  no  share  of  responsi- 
bility for  the  sad  and  bloody  years  from  1861  to  1865. 
And  we  can  further  fairly  claim  that  even  in  the  fiercest 
hour  of  strife  the  Church  upon  both  sides  of  the  line 
did,  on  the  whole,  preserve  the  spirit  of  our  common 
Master.  While  there  was  yet  the  hope  and  possibility 
of  peace,  the  Church  clung  to  that  hope,  and  strove 
in  prayer  and  in  exhortation  to  develop  that  possibility 
into  fact.  After  all  prospect  of  South  Carolina's 
remaining  in  the  Union  had  disappeared,  the  Church- 
men of  Charleston,  which  was  the  very  centre  and 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        \) 

vortex  of  secession  and  anti-Union  sentiment,  continued 
faithfully  to  pray  for  the  President  and  the  Congress 
of  the  United  States,  until  the  Ordinance  of  Secession 
had  actually  been  adopted.  In  the  face  of  popular 
clamor  against  the  use  of  the  same  prayers  in  Tennessee 
Bishop  Otey  published  an  open  letter,  not  to  his  own 
people,  as  he  was  careful  to  say,  but  addressed  to  others, 
showing  them  why  the  Church  in  Tennessee  must 
still  pray  for  the  constituted  authorities. 

It  was  in  this  time  of  uncertainty  and  of  exasperated 
public  passions,  that  the  Southern  Church,  under  the 
lead  of  its  noble  Bishops,  took  that  stand  upon  the 
ground  of  its  spiritual  character  and  mission  which 
was  its  safeguard  through  those  years  of  peril. 

From  the  beginning  to  the  end  the  War  came  closer 
to  the  Southern  people  than  it  did  to  our  Northern 
brethren.  As  a  rule  the  people  of  the  South  had  been 
more  interested  in  purely  political  questions  than  the 
people  of  the  North;  and  so  large  a  proportion  of  the 
Southern  leaders,  both  soldiers  and  civilians,  being 
Churchmen,  our  Bishops  and  ecclesiastical  leaders 
moved  more  within  the  heated  atmosphere  of  public 
national  life,  and  were  strongly  imbued  with  the 
political  feelings  animating  their  friends  and  associates. 
I  believe  this  to  have  been  the  situation  of  our  Bishops 
and  Clergy  in  the  South  more  than  of  those  of  the 
same  classes  in  the  North.  There  was  no  lack  of 
sympathy  even  with  the  extremest  school  of  politicians 
among  many  of  the  Clergy  and  some  of  the  Bishops 
of  the  South.     But  both  North  and  South  the  Church, 


10  THECHURCH 

as  a  Church,  had  kept  free  of  poUtical  entanglements. 
This  was  strikingly  exemplified  in  the  course  of  the 
leading  Churchmen  of  the  South  during  the  trying 
days  of  1860  and  1861. 

In  view  of  the  disturbed  and  perilous  state  of  the 
country  the  civil  authorities  in  South  Carolina  ap- 
pointed November  21,  1860,  as  a  day  of  public  fasting 
and  prayer,  and  in  Alabama  November  29  was  ap- 
pointed for  the  same  observance.  In  both  States 
the  Bishop  set  forth  special  devotions  for  those  days, 
breathing  a  spirit  of  unaffected  humility  and  love, 
praying  that  God  would  overrule  all  their  pur- 
poses to  the  ends  of  truth,  justice,  righteousness,  and 
peace. 

The  President  of  the  United  States  appointed 
Friday,  January  4,  as  a  day  of  fasting  and  prayer, 
and  the  day  was  very  widely  observed  as  such  through- 
out the  South.  In  more  than  one  Diocese  the  Bishop 
called  the  attention  of  his  people  to  the  President's 
appointment,  and  set  forth  special  services  or  prayers 
for  the  day.  In  doing  this  Bishop  Otey  issued  a 
Pastoral  Letter  to  his  Diocese,  and  charged  his  Clergy, 
by  the  solemn  obligation  of  their  ordination  vow,  to 
warn  their  people  of  the  perils  imminently  threatening 
"the  public  safety  and  welfare  by  reason  of  the  pride, 
licentiousness,  violence,  bloodshed,  blasphemy,  and 
irreligion  which  disturb  the  peace  of  society,  defile 
the  land,  and  provoke  the  wrath  of  Heaven.  Passion 
and  prejudice,  arrogance  and  defiance  —  the  most 
dangerous  impulses  to  masses  of  men  —  rule  the  hour. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      11 

Appeals  to  the  mild  precepts  and  charitable  spirit  of 
the  Gospel  are  considered  mean  and  cowardly,  and 
many,  under  the  obligations  of  a  Christian  profession, 
speak  and  act  as  though  their  allegiance  to  their 
country  absolved  them  from  their  duty  of  submission 
to  the  laws  and  exempted  them  from  obedience  to 
God.  Let  it  be  our  business  as  ambassadors  of  the 
Prince  of  Peace  to  inculcate  forbearance,  to  teach 
those  for  whose  souls  we  watch  that  'the  wrath  of 
man  worketh  not  the  righteousness  of  God';  to  'let 
their  moderation  be  known  to  all  men';  to  'study  to 
be  quiet,  and  to  mind  their  own  business';  and  espe- 
cially to  be  obedient  to  the  laws  and  encourage  others 
to  be  orderly,  peaceable,  submissive,  and  'ready  to 
every  good  word  and  work.'"  In  addition  to  public 
prayers  Bishop  Otey  in  the  same  Pastoral  sets  forth 
a  long  prayer  for  private  use  in  families,  morning  and 
evening,  to  much  the  same  purpose.  Bishop  Polk 
set  forth  a  special  prayer  for  the  same  day,  as  well  as 
for  general  use,  in  the  Diocese  of  Louisiana,  and 
Bishop  Gregg,  of  Texas,  appointed  a  special  service. 
Bishop  Atkinson  preached  himself  upon  this  fast-day 
in  the  largest  church  in  his  Diocese  a  noble  sermon 
upon  the  national  ruin  w^hich  follows  upon  sin  and 
unrighteousness,  from  the  text:  "Wheresoever  the 
carcass  is  there  will  the  eagles  be  gathered  together." 
In  the  midst  of  gathering  clouds  and  distant  mutter- 
ings  of  the  coming  storm  the  most  widely  circulated 
Church  paper  in  the  South  ^  seized  the  occasion  time 
^  The  Church  Intelligencer,  published  in  Raleigh. 


1^  THECHURCH 

and  again  to  speak  most  strongly  of  the  evils  of  political 
preaching,  to  which  some  might  be  tempted  by  the 
general  excitement,  and  urged  the  importance  of 
applying  public  events  to  spiritual  uses  by  arousing 
people  to  repentance  and  amendment  of  life,  thus 
emphasizing  amid  the  pressure  of  secular  affairs  the 
spiritual  mission  of  the  Church.  Never  did  the  Church 
more  truly  show  the  spirit  of  the  Master  than  in  this 
time  of  doubt  and  of  fear. 

South  Carolina  passed  her  Ordinance  of  Secession 
December  20,  1860.  December  19  the  Rev.  C.  P. 
Gadsden,  of  Charleston,  wrote  to  a  friend  in  Washing- 
ton: "I  prayed  myself  this  morning  (Wednesday) 
in  the  public  service  for  both  President  and  Congress, 
and  shall  do  so  until  the  State  secedes."  In  each 
Southern  State,  as  each,  by  the  solemn  and  deliberate 
action  of  its  people  in  convention  assembled,  with- 
drew from  the  Union,  these  prayers  ceased.  As  a 
rule  the  change  was  made  quietly  and  with  a  feeling, 
and  sometimes  with  words,  of  sadness.  In  making 
the  announcement  to  his  people  good  Bishop  Rutledge, 
of  Florida,  says:  '*We  cannot  contemplate  (as  Chris- 
tians) this  dismemberment  of  the  Union  without 
deepest  regret."  Even  in  South  Carolina  there  seems 
to  have  been  a  gentle  aversion  on  the  part  of  saintly 
Bishop  Davis  to  contemplate  the  unavoidable  results 
to  the  Church  of  this  act  of  the  State.  The  Bishop 
of  Texas,  himself  but  newly  transplanted  from  South 
Carolina,  gives  a  most  striking  illustration  of  the  reluc- 
tance with  which  Churchmen  faced  the  new  aspect 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      13 

of  ecclesiastical  affairs.  In  his  admira})le  Pastoral 
Letter  of  December  27,  18(K),  he  speaks  beautifully 
of  the  duty  of  Christians  in  those  times  of  strife  and 
discord:  "I  charge  you  then  as  you  will  have  to 
answer  to  the  Judge  of  quick  and  dead,  to  remember 
the  part  you  are  taking,  and  the  spirit  with  which  you 
act,  at  this  grave  juncture  of  our  history.  .  .  .  That 
holy  religion,  whose  blessing  is  above  all  price,  calls 
you  to  moderation  and  charity.  The  benign  spirit 
of  Christianity  invokes  you  to  illustrate  its  principles." 
Even  after  Texas  had  seceded,  in  a  Pastoral  Letter 
dated  March  5,  1861,  and  in  his  Convention  Address 
the  following  month,  he  preserves  a  tone  of  very  great 
moderation.  In  giving  directions  for  the  change  in 
the  prayers  for  the  civil  authorities  he  says:  "In  the 
meantime  the  Church  at  large  will  go  on  as  heretofore 
under  God,  presenting  therein  a  salutary  spectacle 
and  ever-timely  lesson  to  the  world,  in  the  discharge 
of  her  divine  mission,  with  her  unity  undisturbed  and 
the  communion  of  saints  unbroken,  preaching  peace 
on  earth,  good  wall  towards  men,  and  leaving  the 
course  of  God's  providential  rule,  and  the  best  interests 
of  our  holy  religion,  to  determine  her  action  in  the 
future." 

It  was  the  Bishop  of  Louisiana  who  sounded  the 
first  clear  note  for  the  separate  and  independent 
organization  of  the  Church  in  the  South.  It  is  not 
at  all  certain  that  in  sentiment  he  differed  from  his 
most  conservative  Southern  brethren.  His  sincerity 
no  one  ever  doubted,  and  his  expressions  of  regret  at 


14  THECHURCH 

the  rending  asunder  of  the  relations  with  the  brethren 
in  the  North  are  most  deep  and  tender.  But  he  was 
eminently  a  man  of  action,  of  firm  and  decided  char- 
acter, who  upon  taking  any  position,  or  entering  upon 
any  course  of  action,  accepted  at  once  what  he  recog- 
nized as  its  natural  and  necessary  consequences.  The 
other  Southern  Bishops,  as  a  rule,  accepted  in  the 
first  instance  the  fact  of  secession  and  the  actual 
interruption  of  accustomed  relations  without  looking 
further,  perhaps  without  rigidly  examining  them- 
selves as  to  what  in  their  own  minds  the  next  step 
must  be.  Doubtless  some  had  no  clear  views  as  to 
future  consequences;  as  good  Bishop  Gregg  had  said: 
"Leaving  the  course  of  God's  providential  rule  .  .  . 
to  determine  her  [the  Church's]  action  in  the  future"; 
or  as  Bishop  Rutledge:  "But  it  is  in  the  hand  of  Provi- 
dence." Equally  submissive  to  God's  Providence 
Bishop  Polk  saw  certain  consequences  absolutely 
unavoidable,  in  his  understanding  of  ecclesiastical 
history  and  polity.  Many  wiser  men  differed  with 
him,  but  it  is  quite  probable  that  he  was  entirely 
unconscious  what  weighty  reasons  could  be  urged 
upon  the  other  side.  To  his  mind  there  was  no  possi- 
bility of  any  other  course,  and  he  spoke  out  in  a  voice 
that  startled  the  Church,  and  aroused  instant  response 
of  concurrence  or  of  opposition.  Upon  the  secession 
of  the  State  of  Louisiana  he  issued  a  Pastoral  and 
declared  his  position,  January  30,  1861:  "The  State 
of  Louisiana  having  by  a  formal  ordinance,  through 
her   Delegates  in   Convention  assembled,  withdrawn 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      15 

herself  from  all  further  connection  with  the  United 
States  of  America,  and  constituted  herself  a  separate 
sovereignty,  has  by  that  act  removed  our  Diocese  from 
within  the  pale  of  the  'Protestant  Ei)iscopal  Church 
in  the  United  States.'  We  have  therefore  an  inde- 
pendent Diocesan  existence.  ...  In  withdrawing 
ourselves  therefore  from  all  political  connection  with 
the  Union  to  which  our  brethren  belong,  we  do  so 
with  hearts  filled  with  sorrow  at  the  prospect  of  its 
forcing  a  termination  of  our  ecclesiastical  connec- 
tion with  them  also.  .  .  .  Our  separation  from  our 
brethren  of  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  has  been  effected  because  we  must 
follow  our  nationality.  Not  because  there  has  been 
any  difference  of  opinion  as  to  Christian  Doctrine  or 
Catholic  usage.  Upon  these  points  we  are  still  one. 
With  us  it  is  a  separation,  not  division,  certainly  not 
alienation.  And  there  is  no  reason  w4iy,  if  we  should 
find  the  union  of  our  Dioceses  under  one  National 
Church  impracticable,  we  should  cease  to  feel  for  each 
other  the  respect  and  regard  with  which  purity  of 
manners,  high  principle,  and  manly  devotion  to  truth, 
never  fail  to  inspire  generous  minds." 

This  bold  and  bald  statement,  that  political  action 
of  the  State  determines  ipso  facto  the  status  of  the 
Church  in  its  most  intimate  relations  with  its  compo- 
nent parts,  and  the  resulting  dissolution  of  all  consti- 
tutional and  canonical  connections  and  obligations, 
produced  a  painful  impression  in  both  sections  of  the 
country.     Three  months  later,  April  25,  Bishop  Polk 


16  THECHURCH 

put  forth  another  Pastoral,  attempting,^  not  very 
felicitously,  to  explain  his  first;  and  a  large  and  able 
committee  of  his  Convention  made  an  elaborate  report 
endeavoring  to  maintain  the  position  he  had  taken; 
and  that  position  was  hotly  debated  by  learned  cor- 
respondents on  both  sides  of  the  question  in  the  Church 
papers.  None  of  the  other  leaders  in  the  South  ever 
took  exactly  Bishop  Polk's  position.  They  endeavored 
to  reach  the  same  conclusion  by  different  arguments. 
But  Bishop  Polk  had  seen  two  things  clearly  and  had 
stated  them  briefly  and  forcibly.  He  had  seen  that, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  separation  between  North  and 
South,  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  political,  had  come; 
and  that  the  practical  effect  of  secession  was  that  the 
Church  North  and  South,  in  the  then  state  of  public 
feeling  outside  the  Churchy  could  not  go  on  under  one 
administration.  If  every  Churchman  in  the  South 
and  in  the  North  had  desired  it,  it  could  not  have 
been  done.  Whether  his  theory  was  correct  or  not, 
he  saw  the  facts  of  the  situation  as  they  w^ere,  and  he 
stated  the  facts.  He  was  more  conversant  with  facts 
than  with  theories.  Again,  he  saw  also  that  this  separa- 
tion was  forced  upon  the  Church  from  without,  and 
had  not  come  from  within;  and  he  gave  felicitous 
expression  to  that  fact  in  a  phrase  which  came  to  be 
the  common  expression  to  describe  the  situation  — 
^  He  goes  so  far,  in  this  second  Pastoral,  as  to  suggest  that,  though 
present  circumstances  demand  present  union  of  the  Southern  Dio- 
ceses in  a  separate  organization,  yet  the  future  may  allow  a  union 
of  North  and  South  in  matters  of  a  general  nature,  "  in  which  greater 
efficiency  would  result  from  a  union  of  our  resources  and  energies." 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      17 

*'  Separated,  not  Divided.*''  A  family  united  in  heart 
may  be  broken  up  by  sad  providences  and  scattered 
far  asunder;  but  the  h)ve  of  j)arent  and  child,  of 
brothers  and  sisters,  thus  sundered,  still  glows  in  their 
hearts;  the  family  is  a  separated  family,  not  a  divided 
family. 

For  some  time  yet  no  other  of  the  great  leaders 
spoke  authoritatively  on  this  subject.  And  from  dis- 
tant Texas  comes  the  voice  of  its  earnest  Missionary 
Bishop  to  say  how  far  he  was  at  that  time  from  tak- 
ing Bishop  Polk's  position.  He  says,  April  11:  "If 
again  the  general  sentiment  of  the  Church  North  and 
South  should  ultimately  be  found  to  tend  to  the 
expediency  of  the  severance  of  the  ecclesiastical  union 
heretofore  existing,  the  friendly  consultation  on  our 
part,^  as  preparatory  to  the  final  action  of  the  General 
Convention,  would  be  in  every  way  desirable."  And 
this  suggestion  of  a  separation  into  two  Provinces,  as 
it  were,  by  the  action  of  the  General  Convention,  was  not 
without  its  advocates  in  other  parts  of  the  South. 

But  it  had  by  this  time  become  plain  to  all  that,  to 
prevent  confusion  and  the  unwisdom  of  divided  coun- 
sels, steps  should  be  taken  for  a  conference  of  the 
Dioceses  in  the  seceded  States.  Bishop  Polk  and 
Bishop  Elliott,  the  seniors  among  the  Bishops  of  these 
Dioceses,  met  at  Sewanee,  the  seat  of  that  great  enter- 
prise, the  University  of  the  South,  in  the  early  spring, 

^  This  refers  to  the  call  issued  by  Bishops  Polk  and  EUiott,  March 
23,  1861,  for  a  meeting  of  the  Southern   Bishops  and   Dioceses  in 
Montgomery,  July  3,  1861,  as  will  presently  appear. 
3 


18  THECHURCH 

and  sent  out  over  their  joint  names  the  following  letter 
to  their  Episcopal  brethren  and  to  the  Standing  Com- 
mittee of  the  Diocese  of  Alabama,  whose  Bishop  had 
died  January  11,  1861: 

University  Place, 

Franklin  County,  Tenn. 
March  23rd,   1861. 
Rt.  Rev.  and  Dear  Brother: 

"The  rapid  march  of  events  and  the  change  which 
has  taken  place  in  our  civil  relations,  seem  to  us,  your 
brethren  in  the  Church,  to  require  an  early  consulta- 
tion among  the  Dioceses  of  the  Confederate  States,  for 
the  purpose  of  considering  their  relations  to  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States,  of  which 
they  have  so  long  been  the  equal  and  happy  members. 
This  necessity  does  not  arise  out  of  any  dissension 
which  has  occurred  within  the  Church  itself,  nor  out  of 
any  dissatisfaction  with  either  the  doctrine  or  disci- 
pline of  the  Church.  We  rejoice  to  record  the  fact, 
that  we  are  to-day,  as  Churchmen,  as  truly  brethren  as 
we  have  ever  been;  and  that  no  deed  has  been  done, 
nor  word  uttered,  which  leaves  a  single  wound  rankling 
in  our  hearts.  We  are  still  one  in  Faith,  in  purpose 
and  in  Hope;  but  political  changes,  forced  upon  us 
by  a  stern  necessity,  have  occurred,  which  have  placed 
our  Dioceses  in  a  position  requiring  consultation  as  to 
our  future  ecclesiastical  relations.  It  is  better  that 
these  relations  should  be  arranged  by  the  common 
consent  of  all  the  Dioceses  within  the  Confederate 
States  than  by  the  independent  action  of  each  Diocese. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      19 

The  one  will  i)r()l)a})ly  lead  to  harmonious  aetion,  the 
other  miglit  produce  inconvenient  diversity.  We  pro- 
pose to  you  therefore,  dear  brethren,  that  you  recom- 
mend to  your  Diocesan  Convention,  the  appointment 
of  three  clerical  and  three  lay  deputies,  who  shall  be 
delegates  to  meet  an  equal  number  from  each  of  the 
Dioceses  within  the  Confederate  States,  at  Mont- 
gomery, in  the  Diocese  of  Alabama,  on  the  third  day 
of  July  next,  to  consult  upon  such  matters  as  may 
have  arisen  out  of  the  changes  in  our  civil  affairs. 

"We  have  taken  it  upon  ourselves  to  address  you 
this  Circular  because  w^e  happen  to  be  together,  and 
are  the  senior  Bishops  of  the  Dioceses  within  the 
Confederate  States. 

"Very  truly  yours  in  Christian  bonds, 

"Leonidas  Polk,  Bishop  of  Louisiana. 

"Stephen  Elliott,   Bishop   of  Georgia, 
"  P.S.     We  have  named  as  late  a  day  as  the  3rd  of 
July    because    the    Diocesan    Convention    of    South 
Carolina  does  not  meet  this  year  until  the  16th  day  of 
June." 

This  is  the  document  which  called  the  Bishops  and 
representatives  of  the  Southern  Church  together,  and 
made  the  beginning  of  the  *'  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States  of  America," 

There  was  at  this  time  an  amazing  diversity  of 
opinion,  among  the  Bishops  and  Churchmen  of  the 
South,  as  to  the  effect  of  the  secession  of  a  State  upon 


20  THECHURCH 

the  ecclesiastical  status  of  the  Diocese  within  that 
State.  Bishop  Polk  had  boldly  asserted  the  principle 
that  the  Church  must  follow  nationality,  and  that  by  the 
mere  force  of  the  secession  of  the  State  of  Louisiana 
the  Diocese  of  Louisiana  was  torn  away  from  all 
ecclesiastical  relations,  and  was  isolated,  with  respect 
to  all  other  Dioceses  in  the  world.  No  other  Bishop 
or  Diocese,  except  perhaps  the  Bishop  and  Diocese  of 
Texas  after  1861,  ever  took  so  radical  a  position. 
Alabama,  when  her  Convention  met.  May  2,  1861, 
declared  in  effect  that  the  diocesan  constitution  had 
been  adopted  upon  the  ground  that  the  State  of 
Alabama  was  one  of  the  United  States,  and  would  so 
continue;  and  that,  the  State  having  withdrawn  from 
the  Union,  the  constitution,  so  far  as  it  had  assumed 
the  existence  of  that  bond  between  the  States,  was 
now  of  no  force.  The  Convention  therefore  declared 
the  first  article  of  the  diocesan  constitution,  and  all 
canonical  legislation  depending  on  that  article,  null  and 
void.  This  was  not  quite  the  same  as  saying  that 
the  Church  must  follow  nationality,  but  only  that  the 
particular  conditions  of  its  organization  required  each 
Diocese  to  be  within  the  United  States. 

The  Bishop  of  Georgia  argued  out  this  same  position 
very  ably,  alleging  that  it  was  the  mind  of  the  Church, 
in  its  Constitution  of  1789,  that  the  Bishop  shall  go 
with  his  jurisdiction:  "He  is  a  Bishop  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  not  because  he  is  a  Bishop  of  the 
Church  Catholic,  but  because  he  is  the  Bishop  of 
Maine,  or  of  New  York,  or  of  New  Jersey,  as  the  case 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      21 

may  be.  When  the  jurisdiction,  therefore,  of  a  Bishop 
declares  itself,  in  the  exercise  of  its  rightful  sovereignty, 
to  be  thenceforth  and  for  ever  separated  from  the  other 
jurisdictions  which  make  up  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States,  it  forces  him  necessarily 
into  a  like  separation.  .  .  .  The  separation  of  his 
jurisdiction  severs  him  at  once  from  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  m  the  United  States,  not  simply  be- 
cause the  Church  must  follow  the  nationality,  but 
because  the  Church  of  the  United  States  has  tram- 
melled itself  with  constitutional  and  canonical  provi- 
sions, which  force  the  Church  and  its  Bishop  into  this 
attitude."  In  the  Convention  of  Georgia  there  was  a 
very  general  expression  of  an  earnest  desire  to  preserve 
the  unity  of  the  Church,  if  possible,  and  it  was  sug- 
gested that  the  Constitution  and  Canons  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  should  be 
so  amended  as  to  render  the  Church  "wholly  superior 
to  territorial  destructions  [qu:  distinctions?]  in  the 
prosecution  of  her  work." 

In  the  Diocese  of  Florida  it  was  very  earnestly 
debated  in  the  Convention,  Whether  the  Diocese  had 
the  right,  after  the  secession  of  the  State,  to  send 
deputies  to  the  General  Convention.  And  it  was 
decided  almost  unanimously  that,  under  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  Church  in  the  United  States,  there  was 
no  such  right. 

But  it  was  the  Bishop  of  South  Carolina  who  gave 
the  most  ingenious  turn  to  this  constitutional  argu- 
ment, and  maintained  that  position  with  most  subtle 


22  THECHURCH 

skill.  He  went  back  to  the  principle  of  the  old  English 
statutes  of  Proemunire^  which  denied  the  right  of  any- 
foreign  power  to  exercise  jurisdiction  within  the  realm 
of  England,  thereby  destroying  the  Pope's  claim  to 
jurisdiction  in  matters  ecclesiastical.  Bishop  Davis's 
argument  is  most  interesting  and  acute.  He  distinctly 
repudiates  Bishop  Polk's  theory  and  thus  sets  forth 
his  own:  He  says  it  had  been  "thought  by  some  that 
the  secession  of  the  State  necessarily  carried  with 
it  the  secession  of  the  Church,  but  this  can  hardly 
be  allowed,  unless  there  be  some  compact  to  that  end, 
entered  into  by  the  Church  herself.  She  is  intrinsically^ 
a  spiritual  polity.  She  was  so  constituted  by  her 
divine  Lord,  and  for  many  years  maintained  that  posi- 
tion alone.  But  she  is  capable  of  union  with  other 
ecclesiastical  bodies,  and  with  the  State  itself.  Neces- 
sarily, however,  it  must  be  only  with  her  own  consent, 
and  she  must  preserve  her  independent  spirituality  as  a 
Church.  The  effect,  therefore,  of  the  action  of  the 
State  upon  the  Church,  or  of  confederated  dioceses 
upon  a  single  diocese,  must  be  by  compact  or  consti- 
tutional law.  In  England  there  was  a  union  between 
the  Church  and  State.  One  of  the  laws  of  that  United 
Kingdom  was,  that  no  subject  of  a  foreign  government 
should  exercise  spiritual  jurisdiction  in  Great  Britain. 
Thus,  when  the  United  States  were  acknowledged  as 
an  independent  government,  the  clergy  who  were  the 
subjects  of  that  government  became  necessarily  sepa- 
rated from  the  English  Church,  and  excluded  from 
spiritual  jurisdiction  therein  or  subjection  thereunto. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      23 

The  same  principle  lyin^,  I  think,  deep  in  the  })os()in.s 
of  those  who  originated  the  constitution  oi"  the  General 
Convention,  was  wrought  into  that  document,  and  the 
principle  is  there  set  forth,  and  is,  I  think,  more  thor- 
oughly incorporated  in  it  even  than  expressed,  that 
none  but  a  citizen  of  the  United  States  shall  be  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States.  We  are,  of  course,  so  no  longer,  nor  entitled 
to  spiritual  jurisdiction  therein,  nor  subject  to  the 
government  thereof.  .  .  .  There  is  no  principle  of 
spiritual  life  involved,  there  is  no  article  of  faith  at 
issue.  It  is  simply  a  question  of  constitutional  con- 
federation, and  our  conclusion  is  that  the  condition  of 
confederation  being  broken,  the  confederation  exists 
no  longer.  ...  It  has  been  broken  also  by  action 
without  ourselves  as  a  Church.  The  course  of  divine 
providence,  in  the  entire  change  of  the  government 
of  which  we  are  subjects,  has  determined  this  for 
us." 

Renewing  the  same  question  in  his  Convention 
Address  of  1862,  Bishop  Davis  says:  "Jurisdiction  in 
the  Church  is  not  strictly  jure  divino.  The  right  of 
jurisdiction  is,  but  the  appointments  and  arrangements 
are  not.  Therefore,  although  in  the  Church  its  con- 
struction and  relations  must  be  human  only.  They 
must  occupy  the  same  ground  as  other  human  insti- 
tutions, and  be  subject  to  the  dispensations  of  Divine 
Providence  and  the  necessary  changes  of  things.  The 
truth  is  the  present  great  revolution  is  a  dispensation 
extraordinary,   and  a  revelation  from  God.     It  is  a 


24  THECHURCH 

voice  from  on  high,  speaking  to  men,  and  changing 
and  shaping  the  forms  of  society  both  civil  and 
rehgious." 

He  refers  to  his  proposition  set  forth  the  year  be- 
fore: *' I  see  no  reason  to  change  that  judgment.  The 
more  it  is  examined  into,  the  more  I  think  it  will 
appear,  that  the  words  'in  the  United  States'  in 
Article  I,  and  'in  any  of  the  United  States'  in  Article 
V,  are  terms  of  jurisdiction,  and  not  merely  descrip- 
tive of  locality.  .  .  . 

"So  far  I  have  not  considered  the  case  of  original 
diocesan  independency  —  subject,  however,  to  the  just 
and  due  relations  to  Catholic  Christianity,  and  the 
associated  duties  thence  resulting.  This  I  acknowl- 
edge: and  that  it  is  the  proper  form  into  which  the 
Church  resolves  herself  upon  every  necessary  dissolu- 
tion of  confederacy." 

The  whole  discussion  is  most  interesting,  and  it  is 
the  ablest  argument  and  the  strongest  presentation  of 
the  position  of  those  who  held  that  the  secession 
of  the  State  necessarily  involved  the  separation  of  the 
Diocese  from  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  Bishop 
Davis  was  by  birth  and  education  a  North  Carolinian, 
and  most  of  his  ministry  before  his  elevation  to  the 
Episcopate  had  been  in  that  Diocese.  He  had  now 
for  some  years  been  a  citizen  of  South  Carolina,  the 
home  of  the  great  metaphysical  statesman,  Calhoun, 
and  his  reasoning  seems  to  show  the  influence  of  his 
later  surroundings.  He  had  been  bred  to  the  Bar,  and 
was   an   elder   brother   of   the   eminent   lawyer,    Mr. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      25 

George  Davis,  Attorney-General  of  the    Confederate 
States. 

Bishop  Lay,  consecrated  in  1859  "Missionary  Bishop 
for  the  South  West,"  found  himself  in  a  somewhat 
different  situation  from  that  of  the  other  Southern 
Bishops.  He  had  no  diocese,  and  was  merely  minis- 
tering, under  the  authority  of  the  House  of  Bishops  of 
the  Church  in  the  United  States,  within  a  territory 
assigned  by  them.  No  diocese  had  been  organized 
within  the  State  of  Arkansas,  the  place  of  his  residence 
and  the  region  of  his  chief  activity.  But  the  State  of 
Arkansas  had  seceded.  His  strong  sense  of  the  divine 
character  and  authority  of  the  Church  made  him  slow 
to  recognize  any  effect  upon  its  organization  and  con- 
stitutional position  to  be  effected  by  the  mere  political 
action  of  the  secular  power.  As  a  reasonable  man 
dealing  with  actual  conditions  he  recognized  the  neces- 
sity of  a  separate  organization  for  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States,  since  there  was  an  actual  separa- 
tion making  united  action  impossible;  but  he  looked 
for  a  separation  to  be  authorized  by  the  Church  as  a 
whole,  acting  through  the  General  Convention,  such 
as  Bishop  Gregg  had  at  first  suggested.  When  the 
course  of  events  made  this  no  longer  possible,  he  found 
his  position  most  perplexing.  "Diocesan  Bishops,"  he 
argued,  "possess  a  character,  and  are  invested  with 
a  jurisdiction,  which  remain  unaltered  by  any  re- 
arrangement of  Provincial  boundaries."  On  the  other 
hand,  "The  Missionary  Bishop  is  a  delegate  sent  forth 
by  the  general  body,  dependent  for  jurisdiction  on  its 


26  THECHURCH 

will."  This  general  body,  the  Church  in  the  United 
States,  claimed  jurisdiction  over  the  citizens  and 
territory  of  the  United  States.  As  he  no  longer  recog- 
nized Arkansas  to  be  a  part  of  the  territory  of  the 
United  States,  and  as  that  was  his  residence  and 
included  most  of  the  congregations  under  his  care, 
though  his  jurisdiction  embraced  also  territory  still 
within  the  limits  of  the  United  States,  he  felt  that  he 
should  resign  his  commission  as  Missionary  Bishop  of 
the  Church  in  the  United  States.  July  26,  1861,  he 
addressed  a  letter  to  the  Presiding  Bishop  of  the  Church 
in  the  United  States,  resigning  his  jurisdiction  as  Mis- 
sionary Bishop  of  that  Church.  On  the  same  day  he 
addressed  a  letter  to  the  Bishops  of  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States,  notifying  them  of  his  action,  and 
saying  that,  though  without  canonical  authority,  he 
would  continue  his  Episcopal  ministrations  in  Arkan- 
sas until  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  should 
take  action  upon  the  matter. 

Although  learned  Bishops  and  astute  committees 
did  not  commit  themselves  to  Bishop  Polk's  dictum 
that  the  Church  must  follow  nationality  —  and  even 
the  Committee  of  his  own  Convention,  though  they 
employed  the  phrase  and  endeavored  to  give  a  certain 
support  to  it  by  reference  to  early  national  churches, 
did  really  base  their  argument  upon  the  particular 
facts  of  our  American  history  —  yet,  without  question, 
the  prevailing  motive  in  most  cases  sprang  out  of  the 
strong  national  sentiment  aroused  by  the  approaching 
struggle.     In  the  popular  mind  "the  Church  must  fol- 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES     27 

low  nationality."  This  was  the  feehng  which  showed 
itself  in  editorials  and  correspondence  in  Tlie  Church 
Intelligencer,  the  most  widely  circulated  Church 
paper  in  the  South.  The  words  of  the  Preface  to  the 
American  Prayer  Book  seemed  to  support  this  view; 
and  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  this  sentiment, 
sanctioned  apparently  by  the  very  words  of  the  Church, 
prevailed  more  with  the  average  Churchman  than  the 
most  ingenius  constitutional  argument.  It  was  pointed 
out,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the  relation  between  the 
Church  and  the  civil  government  in  England  justified 
the  statement  in  1789  that,  *'When  in  the  course  of 
Divine  Providence,  these  American  States  became 
independent  with  respect  to  civil  government,  their 
ecclesiastical  independence  was  necessarily  included," 
as  we  read  in  the  Preface  to  the  Prayer  Book.  But  it 
is  much  easier  to  accept  the  statement  as  it  stands 
than  to  search  out  its  limitations  and  qualifications. 

These  different  views  were  of  less  importance  at  the 
time  from  the  fact  that  they  all  met  in  one  common 
conclusion  as  to  present  duty.  Whether  because  of 
the  necessity  that  "the  Church  should  follow  nation- 
ality," by  reason  of  some  essential  principle  in  the 
Constitution  of  the  Universal  Church;  or  because  of 
principles  inherited  from  the  English  Church  and  em- 
bedded in  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Convention; 
or  because  of  the  express  provisions  of  Articles  I,  V,  and 
X  of  that  Constitution ;  or  because  of  the  free  and  vol- 
untary action  of  the  Bishop  and  Diocesan  Convention, 
recognizing  the  actual  separation  caused  by  war,  and 


28  THECHURCH 

acting  ex  necessitate  rei  in  providing  for  doing  the  work 
of  the  Church;  —  all  agreed  in  the  necessity  of  separate 
organization. 

The  Bishop  of  North  Carolina  attended  the  opening 
service  of  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  Virginia  of 
1861,  and  joined  Bishop  Meade  and  Bishop  Johns  in 
a  note  addressed  to  the  Bishops  of  the  seceded  States, 
requesting  the  postponement  of  the  meeting  called  for 
in  Bishop  Elliott's  and  Bishop  Polk's  circular,  and 
suggesting  as  a  more  convenient  place  of  meeting 
Raleigh,  Asheville,  or  Sewanee.  Virginia  had  just  se- 
ceded; it  was  evident  that  the  action  of  the  Govern- 
ment at  Washington  would  drive  North  Carolina  to 
take  the  same  course;  and  this  postponement  was 
asked  in  order  that  these  Dioceses,  which  desired  to 
act  in  concert,  might  be  represented  at  the  meeting. 

The  meeting  was  not  postponed,  and  consequently 
Virginia  and  North  Carolina  were  not  represented. 
But  it  may  be  well  in  this  place,  in  connection  with 
what  has  been  said  about  the  position  of  other  Dioceses 
and  Bishops,  to  give  Bishop  Atkinson's  views  as 
developed  in  his  Address  to  his  Convention,  July  10, 
1861,  upon  the  important  question  of  the  effect  of  the 
secession  of  the  State  upon  the  ecclesiastical  status  of 
the  Diocese.  With  the  exception  of  Bishop  Gregg,  all 
the  Bishops  and  Dioceses,  who  had  spoken  or  taken 
action,  had  in  effect  declared  that,  upon  one  ground 
or  another,  the  secession  of  the  State  had  the  effect  of 
separating  the  Diocese  from  the  Church  in  the  United 
States,    though    they    had    varied   somewhat    in    the 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      29 

reasonings  by  which  they  had  reached  this  conclusion. 
Bishop  Atkinson  alone  contended  that  the  poUtical 
action  of  the  State  had,  of  itself,  no  effect  whatever 
upon  the  Church;  but  that  the  Diocese  was  free  to 
remain  connected  with  the  Church  in  the  United 
States,  or  to  form  an  independent  organization,  as  the 
necessity  might  seem  to  require  with  reference  to  its 
own  spiritual  interests  and  work.  He  says  to  his  Con- 
vention of  1861:  "I  do  not  entertain  the  view  which 
many  hold,  that  the  severance  of  the  National  Union 
does  of  itself,  and  without  any  act  of  the  Church, 
produce  a  disruption  of  the  bonds  which  bind  our 
Dioceses  together.  This  is  a  matter  in  itself  of  so 
much  importance,  and  is  likely  to  furnish  so  controlling, 
and,  as  it  seems  to  me,  so  dangerous  a  precedent  for 
the  future,  that  it  ought  to  be  very  carefully  considered, 
before  we  adopt  the  conclusion  just  now  referred  to, 
recommended  though  it  be  by  persons  for  whom  we 
have  the  sincerest  respect.  The  question  is  not,  you 
observe,  what  may  these  Southern  Dioceses  rightfully 
and  wisely  do,  but  what  is  the  effect  on  them,  willing 
or  unwilling,  of  what  others  have  done. 

"It  is  clearly  wise,  and  even  necessary,  that  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States 
shall  be  greatly  modified.  .  .  .  But  that  is  not  the 
matter  before  us  now.  We  have  first  to  decide,  not 
whether  we  shall  modify  or  destroy  that  Church,  but 
whether  there  is  such  a  Church  now  in  existence.  If 
the  Dioceses  established  in  the  States  which  have  se- 
ceded are  no  longer  a  part  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 


30  THECHURCH 

Church  in  the  United  States,  —  are  indeed  no  longer 
a  part  of  any  ecclesiastical  organization,  but  are  sepa- 
rate and  independent  each  of  the  other,  and  each  of 
the  rest  of  Christendom,  —  How  has  this  very  impor- 
tant change  been  brought  about?  Not  by  their  own 
act,  for  those  which  have  acted  in  recognition  of  their 
Diocesan  isolation  only  profess  to  recognize  an  existing 
fact.  They  do  not  separate  from  the  other  Dioceses; 
they  declare  themselves  to  have  been  already  separated 
by  the  acts  of  the  States  within  whose  limits  they  have 
been  organized.  What  were  those  acts?  The  secession 
of  those  States  from  the  Political  Union  of  which  they 
had  previously  formed  a  part.  .  .  .  Take,  for  exam- 
ple, the  case  of  any  one  of  our  Dioceses.  It  is  formed 
within  a  State,  the  population  of  which  is  generally 
alien  to  our  Church,  not  hostile  perhaps,  but  indiffer- 
ent; not  recognizing  its  authority,  of  course  not 
concerned  to  advance  its  growth  or  to  preserve  its  prin- 
ciples. Within  this  mass  of  population,  most  of  whom 
are  attached  to  some  form  of  Protestant  dissent  — 
some  of  whom  are  Roman  Catholics,  a  few  of  whom 
are  Jews,  and  some  rejectors  of  all  revealed  religion  — 
we  have  a  few  congregations,  amounting  in  the  most 
favored  Dioceses  to  not  a  tenth  of  the  whole  number 
of  the  people,  in  others  to  not  a  hundredth.  Does 
the  action  of  such  a  body  politic  determine,  ipso  facto, 
without  the  Church  being  consulted,  without  its 
action,  without  any  expression  of  its  will,  perhaps 
against  its  will,  what  shall  be  its  relation  to  its  sister 
Dioceses,  and  through  them  to  the  Churches  in  alliance 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      31 

with  our  own,  —  to  its  Missions,  Foreign  and  Domes- 
tic, —  to  the  General  Seminary,  and  to  its  entire  Code 
of  Canon  Law,  other  than  that  which  is  merely  Dio- 
cesan? .  .  .  According  to  the  theory  that  secession 
in  the  State  produces  a  disruption  of  the  Church, 
each  Diocese  in  the  seceding  States  is  relegated  to  a 
condition  of  absolute  isolation  and  independence.  .  .  . 
Each  stands  alone  in  Christendom;  conditions  I 
believe  to  be  without  precedent  in  Church  History, 
from  the  Apostles'  time  downward,  except  perhaps 
when  the  ban  of  excommunication  has  rested  on  a 
Diocese.  Its  results  must  be  to  deprive  our  Delegates 
of  their  rights  to  seats  in  the  General  Convention,  in 
the  Board  of  Missions  and  in  the  Board  of  Trustees  of 
the  General  Seminary."  He  calls  attention  to  the 
fact  that  the  State  could  not  by  any  direct  attempt 
thus  deprive  the  Church  of  its  rights,  annul  its  priv- 
ileges, and  confiscate  its  property,  as  well  as  abrogate 
its  most  solemn  laws  and  regulations:  "Yet  shall  we 
say  that  what  could  not  be  done  directly  has  been 
done  indirectly?  ...  Of  course  I  know  that  the 
State  is  not  thinking  of  us,  does  not  wish  to  tyrannize 
over  us,  or  to  exercise  any  power  over  us;  but  the 
question  is,  does  it  really  exercise  this  prodigious 
power  by  virtue  of  principles  and  facts  embodied  in 
the  subject  itself?     I  think  it  does  not,"  etc. 

He  calls  attention  to  the  possible  results  of  such  a 
view  in  the  future:  "Suppose  the  Dioceses  in  the 
Confederate  States  form  a  united  Church,  as  no  doubt 
they  will,  and  that  one  of  these  States  should  after- 


3^  THECHURCH 

wards  secede  from  the  Confederacy,  then  the  Diocese 
in  that  State  will  be  cut  off,  whether  she  wish  it  or  no, 
from  the  Southern  Church;  then  the  Church  through- 
out all  time  will  have  her  relations  settled  for  her  by 
men  not  necessarily  of  her  communion,  perhaps  by 
men  hostile  to  her,  and  anxious  to  destroy  her.  Was 
it  ever  heard  before  that  the  Church  of  Christ  was 
under  such  bondage?" 

He  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  it  is  not  at  all 
clear  that  a  Diocese  in  a  foreign  country  may  not  be 
in  union  with  the  Church  in  the  United  States,  even 
when  there  has  been  no  previous  connection  between 
that  country  and  our  own:  "The  Right  Reverend 
Drs.  Boone  and  Payne  are  Bishops  of  that  Church, 
exercising  Episcopal  functions,  and  possessing  juris- 
diction, under  its  authority,  and  liable  to  its  discipline. 
If  Dioceses  were  established  at  Shanghai  and  Cape 
Palmas,  I  see  no  hindrance  either  in  our  constitution 
or  in  Church  principles,  to  those  Dioceses  being 
received  into  union  with  the  Church  in  the  United 
States." 

To  this  position  the  Bishop  of  North  Carolina 
adhered  with  a  calm  courage  and  confidence  charac- 
teristic of  the  man,  though  it  caused  some  moments  of 
pain  and  misunderstanding  in  the  period  between  the 
secession  of  the  State  and  the  adoption  by  the  Diocese 
of  North  Carolina  of  the  Constitution  of  the  Church 
in  the  Confederate  States,  in  May,  1862. 

He  recurs  to  the  subject  in  his  Convention  Address 
May  15,  1862,  and  the  importance  of  the  question  will 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES     33 

justify  a  further  quotation.  lie  says  in  that  Address: 
"It  is  certain  that  the  Diocese  of  North  Carohna  was, 
in  the  autumn  of  18G0,  a  part  of  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church  in  the  United  States,  and  it  is  equally  certain 
that  that  Church  has  done  no  act  since  to  exscind  it, 
nor  has  the  Diocese  by  its  own  act  withdrawn  itself. 
If  then  it  be  not  now  a  part  of  the  same  Church,  it 
must  have  been  cut  off  by  virtue  of  the  political  change 
produced  by  the  secession  of  the  State.  But  could 
the  State,  by  any  political  act,  destroy  the  organization 
of  the  Church,  and  annul  its  Constitution  and  Canons, 
which  were  its  bonds  of  union  with  the  Church  in  the 
United  States?  If  it  be  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ, 
or  a  part  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  (and  which  of 
its  members  will  declare  it  not  to  be.^).,  then  the  State 
can  neither  make  nor  unmake  it,  alter  or  amend  it, 
directly  or  indirectly;  for  Jesus  Christ  said:  *My 
Kingdom  is  not  of  this  world.'  His  Church,  so  far 
from  being  the  creature  of  the  State,  or  in  the  power 
of  the  State,  like  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter,  to 
receive  any  shape  the  State  may  choose  to  give,  — 
His  Churchy  instead  of  being  thus  ductile  and  malle- 
able, was  planted  in  spite  of  the  State,  and  grew  up 
and  flourished  under  the  most  vehement  and  obsti- 
nate assaults  and  opposition  of  the  State.  He,  then, 
that  proclaims  that  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
is  changed  in  its  organization  and  laws  by  the  mere 
act  of  the  State,  does,  however  little  he  may  intend  it, 
yet  in  effect  declare  that  it  may  be  a  very  respectable 
religious  denomination,  wealthy,  refined  and  orderly, 
4 


34  THECHURCH 

but  that  it  is  no  part  of  the  Church  of  Christ;  and 
does  in  effect  advise  all  its  members,  if  they  desire  to 
partake  of  the  blessings  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  to 
come  out  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Society,  and  go 
elsewhere  for  those  blessings.  I  do  not  see  then,  how 
any  considerate  man,  who  does  believe  in  the  authority 
and  mission  of  the  Church,  can  suppose  that  its  organ- 
ization has  been  broken  up  by  the  mere  act  of  the 
State.  .  .  .  We  do  not  lose  our  rights  and  interest, 
then,  in  that  Church  by  ceasing  to  be  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  but  only  when  we  voluntarily  withdraw 
from  that  Ecclesiastical  organization,  and  establish 
another  for  ourselves.  This,  I  conceive,  we  had  the 
right  to  do,  even  if  the  United  States  had  not  been 
divided,  were  there  sufficient  cause  for  it;  and  that 
division  does  itself  furnish  sufficient  cause.  In  the  mean 
time,  according  to  my  belief,  until  we  form  anew  organi- 
zation, the  old  continues  to  subsist.  There  is  no  inter- 
regnum of  anarchy.  We  are  not  left  weltering  in  chaos, 
without  a  Constitution,  without  any  binding  regula- 
tions for  the  consecration  of  Bishops,  for  the  ordination 
of  Clergymen,  for  the  enforcement  of  discipline,  so 
that  each  man  is  free  to  do  what  is  right  in  his 
own  eyes.  God  forbid  we  should  ever  be  in  such  a 
condition." 

Unfortunately  we  have  no  record  of  the  utterance 
of  the  great  Bishop  of  Tennessee  upon  this  interesting 
question.  The  journal  of  the  Diocese  of  Tennessee 
for  1861  is  said  to  have  been  destroyed  by  a  fire  in  the 
printing  office,  and  was  never  published;  and  no  other 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      35 

Convention  was  held  nntil  that  of  18G5.  It  docs 
appear,  however,  that  he  took  the  same  view  which  is 
so  convincingly  set  forth  in  the  above  passages  from 
Bishop  Atkinson's  addresses  of  18()1  and  186*2.  Bishop 
Atkinson  makes  this  statement  in  tlie  Church  Intelli- 
gencer of  February  21,  1862;  and  it  is  further  evi- 
denced by  the  fact  that  Bishop  Otey,  like  Bishop 
Atkinson,  gave  his  consent  to  the  Consecration  of 
Bishop  Stevens,  of  Pennsylvania,  and  declined  to  con- 
cur in  the  Consecration  of  Bishop  Wilmer,  of  Alabama. 

The  meeting  in  Montgomery,  July  3,  1861,  was  at- 
tended by  Bishops  Elliott,  Green,  Rutledge,  and  Davis 
and  by  fourteen  clergymen  and  eleven  laymen,  repre- 
senting the  Dioceses  of  South  Carolina,  Georgia, 
Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Louisiana.  Texas 
only,  of  the  Dioceses  invited,  was  unrepresented.  The 
proceedings  were  brief,  sensible,  and  marked  by  perfect 
harmony  and  good  feeling.  It  was  in  the  nature  of  a 
conference,  all  orders  sitting  together  and  discussing 
freely  the  few  topics  introduced.  Bishop  Elliott,  as 
the  senior  by  Consecration  of  the  Bishops  present,  was 
called  to  the  chair,  and  the  Rev.  John  M.  Mitchell, 
of  Alabama,  was  appointed  secretary.  A  committee, 
with  the  Bishop  of  Mississippi  as  chairman,  was 
appointed  to  propose  business  for  the  meeting.  This 
committee  brought  in  a  majority  report  signed  by  the 
Episcopal  and  lay  members  of  the  committee,  and  a 
minority  report  by  the  clerical  members  was  presented 
by  the  Rev.  F.  A.  P.  Barnard,  afterwards  the  dis- 


36  THECHURCH 

tinguished  President  of  Columbia  College.  As  is  apt 
to  be  the  case,  the  clergymen  were  rather  more  aggres- 
sive than  the  Bishop  and  the  laymen.  The  difference, 
however,  was  not  very  great.  The  majority  report 
deferred  all  important  action  looking  to  permanent 
organization  to  a  Convention  of  the  Church  in  all 
the  seceded  States,  to  be  held  in  the  summer  of  186^; 
only  recommending  present  action  to  provide  for  the 
missionary  work,  domestic  and  foreign.  The  minor- 
ity urged  the  preparation  by  that  meeting  of  a  Con- 
stitution for  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States, 
following  closely  that  of  the  Church  in  the  United 
States,  to  be  sent  down  to  the  several  Dioceses  for 
ratification  and  adoption.  This  difference  was  wisely 
compromised  by  referring  the  question  of  the  Consti- 
tution to  an  adjourned  meeting  to  be  held  in  Columbia, 
South  Carolina,  October  16,  1861;  and  a  committee 
was  appointed  to  prepare  a  draft  of  a  Constitution 
and  Canons,  to  be  presented  to  that  meeting. 

Resolutions  were  adopted  appointing  Mr.  Jacob  K. 
Sass  and  Mr.  Henry  Trescott,  both  of  Charleston,  to 
be  treasurers  respectively  for  Domestic  and  Foreign 
Missions,  and  requesting  them  to  remit  directly  to 
domestic  and  foreign  missionaries  already  in  the  field 
such  moneys  as  should  be  contributed  to  that  end.  It 
was  also  resolved  that  the  Southern  Dioceses  pledge 
themselves  to  sustain  Bishop  Lay  and  Bishop  Gregg 
in  the  important  work  committed  to  them. 

Recognizing  the  very  great  difference  of  opinion  in 
regard  to  the  theoretical  status  of  the  Dioceses  in  the 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES     37 

Confederate  States  in  relation  to  the  Church  through- 
out the  United  States,  the  Convention  very  wisely: 

''Resolved,  That  the  secession  of  the  States  of 
Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Georgia, 
Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  Texas,  Arkan- 
sas and  Tennessee  from  the  United  States,  and  the 
formation  by  them  of  a  new  government,  called  the 
Confederate  States  of  America,  renders  it  necessary 
and  expedient  that  the  Dioceses  within  those  States 
should  form  among  themselves  an  independent  organ- 
ization." 

The  meeting  then  adjourned  to  the  sixteenth  day 
of  October  following.  The  chairman  in  his  closing 
address  could  say  with  truth  what  can  seldom  be  said 
of  any  meeting:  "We  have  done,  brethren  of  the 
Convention,  enough  at  this  meeting,  and  yet  not  too 
much."  For  men  who  met  together  in  the  opening 
days  of  a  revolution,  in  such  a  stress  of  feeling,  and 
amid  such  discordant  influences,  they  had  shown  a 
calmness,  a  moderation,  a  wisdom,  a  true  Christian 
charity  and  peaceableness,  seldom  equalled. 

SECESSION  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  STATES 

Date  of  the  Ordinance  of  Secession  in 
THE  several  States 

South  Carolina   December  20,  1860 

Mississippi January        9,  1861 

Alabama      "  11.      " 

Florida     "  11,      " 

Georgia    "  19, 

Louisiana "  26, 

Texas   February      1,     " 


38  THECHURCH 

Virginia    April  17,  1861 

Arkansas      May  6, 

Tennessee  ^ "' 

North  Carolina "  20, 

1  The  Ordinance  of  Secession  of  the  State  of  Tennessee  was  passed 
May  6,  and  was  ratified  by  a  popular  vote  June  9  following. 


II 

THE  MEETING  AT  COLUMBIA,  OCTOBER  16,  18G1;  THE 
CASE  OF  BISHOP  POLK;  THE  CONSECRATION  OF 
BISHOP  WILMER;  THE  "GENERAL  COUNCIL"  OF 
NOVEMBER    12,    1862. 

The  Convention  wliicli  met  in  Trinity  Church, 
Columbia,  S.  C,  October  lG-20,  1861,  was  an  ad- 
journed meeting  of  that  which  had  assembled  in  Mont- 
gomery July  3.  By  this  time  the  situation  had  so 
developed  that  every  Diocese  in  the  South  felt  free  to 
participate  in  its  proceedings.  Bishop  Lay,  Mission- 
ary Bishop  of  the  Southwest,  having  his  residence 
and  chief  work  in  Arkansas,  was  also  present.  Of  the 
Bishops,  only  Bishop  Polk  was  absent.  Texas  had 
no  clerical  or  lay  representatives  in  attendance,  and 
Tennessee  and  Louisiana  were  represented  only  in  the 
clerical  order;  but  with  these  exceptions  each  Diocese 
was  present  by  its  Bishop  and  its  deputies  of  both 
orders.  As  at  Montgomery,  all  sat  together  in  one 
deliberative  body  under  the  presidency  of  the  senior 
Bishop,  now  the  venerable  Bishop  Meade,  of  Virginia. 

The  chief  business  was  the  consideration  of  the 
report  of  the  committee  appointed  at  Montgomery  to 
prepare  the  draft  of  a  Constitution  and  a  body  of 
Canons  for  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States. 
However,   only   the  proposed  Constitution  could  be 

39 


40  THECHURCH 

taken  up,  the  Canons  being  referred  to  future  consid- 
eration and  action. 

As  reported  by  the  committee,  the  Constitution 
was,  for  the  most  part,  but  a  rearrangement,  in  some- 
what better  and  more  convenient  form,  of  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  Its  one 
marked  departure  was  the  introduction  of  the  princi- 
ple of  the  Provincial  System,  so  related  to  the  general 
and  diocesan  organization  that,  with  the  growth  of  the 
Church  and  the  multiplication  of  Dioceses,  the  de- 
velopment into  Provinces  would  have  been  automatic 
and  unavoidable.  So  long  as  an  entire  State  remained 
within  the  limits  of  one  Diocese,  that  Diocese  consti- 
tuted one  Province,  and  no  change  was  made.  But  as 
soon  as  more  than  one  Diocese  should  be  formed  within 
a  State,  at  once  the  Provincial  machinery  came  into 
operation.  The  several  diocesan  councils  within  the 
State  Province  would  send  their  representatives  to 
the  Provincial  Council.  This  Provincial  Council  in 
turn  would  elect  deputies  from  its  several  included 
Dioceses  to  the  triennial  General  Council;  and  it 
would  be  only  through  the  medium  of  the  Provincial 
Council  that  the  several  Dioceses  would  have  their 
relations  with  the  General  Council  and  with  the 
Church  in  other  Dioceses  and  Provinces.  In  the 
House  of  Deputies  of  the  General  Council  each 
Province  would  have  but  one  vote  in  each  order;  and 
in  the  House  of  Bishops  all  the  Bishops  of  one  Province, 
whatever  their  number,  would  have  but  one  vote, 
which  would  be  cast  by  the  senior  Bishop  of  the  Prov- 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES     41 

ince.  Each  Province  would  send  five  clerical  and 
five  lay  deputies  to  the  General  Council.  Pending 
the  operation  of  the  proposed  Provincial  System, 
each  Diocese  should  be  represented  in  the  General 
Council  by  three  deputies  of  each  order. 

This  was  too  radical  a  departure  from  the  familiar 
system  to  command  general  support,  but  the  Provin- 
cial System  was  so  far  adopted  as  to  allow  two  or 
more  Dioceses,  formed  within  a  single  State,  to  unite 
and  constitute  a  Province,  should  they  desire  to  do  so; 
as  has  since  been  allowed  by  the  Constitution  of  the 
Church  in  the  United  States.  If  State  Provinces  are 
to  be  desired,  then  the  scheme  set  forth  in  the  pro- 
posed Constitution  for  the  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States  is  much  better  than  what  we  now  have,  for 
it  would  have  effected  its  purpose,  which  our  present 
Article  VII  has  never  done. 

In  the  discussion  of  the  first  Article  of  the  proposed 
Constitution  the  Rev.  Richard  Hines,  of  Tennessee, 
moved  to  amend  by  substituting  the  words  *' Reformed 
Catholic"  in  place  of  "Protestant  Episcopal,"  in  the 
name  of  the  Church;  and  Bishops  Otey,  Green,  and 
Atkinson,  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hewett,  of  Florida,  voted 
with  Dr.  Hines  for  the  change.^    It  w^as  defeated  by  a 

*  As  this  seems  to  have  been  the  first  formal  movement  to  give 
this  name  to  our  Branch  of  the  Church  in  America,  it  may  be  well  to 
notice  the  reasons  assigned  in  the  very  meagre  account  in  The  Church 
Intelligencer  of  what  must  have  been  a  most  interesting  discussion; 
"Bishop  Atkinson  .  .  .  considered  the  question  between 'Protestant* 
and  '  Reformed'  —  the  latter  expressed  a  fact,  the  former  a  spirit.  The 
term  Protestant  denoted  unrest,  doubt,  unbelief,  and  was  indefinite. 


42  THECHURCH 

large  majority,  as  was  also  a  proposal  to  omit  the  word 
"Protestant"  in  the  same  connection. 

The  Constitution  as  adopted  reduced  the  number 
of  Presbyters  and  of  self-supporting  parishes  required 
for  the  formation  of  a  new  Diocese.  It  also  put  the 
House  of  Bishops  and  the  House  of  Deputies  upon  an 
equality  in  matters  of  legislation,  by  removing  the 
provision  of  our  old  Article  III,  by  which  action  by  the 
House  of  Deputies  might  become  effective  without 
the  concurrence  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  even  in 
opposition  to  their  action,  unless  they  should  act  and 
notify  the  Deputies  within  three  days. 

Thus,  with  very  inconsiderable  alterations,  the 
Constitution  remained  as  it  had  been  before.  There 
appeared  to  be  no  eager  desire  for  change  or  for 
emphasizing  the  fact  of  separation.  Nothing  was 
attempted  in  the  way  of  legislation  at  this  time.  It  was 
felt  that,  until  the  Constitution  had  been  ratified  and 
adopted  by  the  Dioceses,  there  could  be  no  proper 
basis  for  canonical  action;  and  so  the  whole  body  of 
Canons,  prepared  and  reported  along  with  the  Consti- 
tution to  the  Convention  of  October,  1861,  was  ordered 
to  be  printed,  and  was  referred  to  the  first  General 
Council  to  be  held  under  the  Constitution  when 
adopted.     One  of  the  changes  of  the  new  Constitution 

He  knew  what  the  Reformation  was,  —  he  did  not  know  what  Protes- 
tantism was.  ...  He  Hked  the  word  Cathohc,because  it  indicated  the 
continuity  of  the  Church  of  Christ."  Church  Intelligencer,  Nov.  1, 
1861.  It  was  claimed  by  some  at  the  time  that  but  for  the  opposition 
from  Virginia  the  change  of  name  would  have  been  adopted.  This, 
however,  seems  very  improbable. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      43 

was  to  substitute  "Council"  for  "Convention"  in  the 
name  of  the  legislative  assemblies,  both  of  the  Dioceses 
and  of  the  national  triennial  meetings,  with  the  rather 
unfortunate  result  of  giving  to  the  latter  the  name, 
quite  inappropriate,  of  ''General  Council^  The  name 
Council  is  still  retained  in  some  of  the  Southern  Dio- 
ceses as  the  designation  of  the  annual  Convention. 

The  report  of  the  committee,  appointed  at  Mont- 
gomery in  July  to  draw  up  a  scheme  for  carrying  on 
the  general  missionary  work,  was  also  referred  to  the 
future  Council,  and  Mr.  Sass  and  Mr.  Trescott  were 
requested  to  continue  to  act  as  treasurers  of  Domestic 
and  Foreign  Missions  respectively.  They  were  author- 
ized to  distribute  such  funds  as  might  be  sent  to 
them  for  general  work  among  the  missionaries  in 
the  field.  Contributions  for  Domestic  Missions  w^ere 
ordered  to  be  "distributed  among  the  Bishops,  for 
their  respective  fields,  according  to  the  rates  of  ap- 
propriation made  by  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States  for  the  present  year." 

It  was,  on  motion  of  the  Rev.  Richard  H.  Wilmer, 
afterwards   Bishop   of   Alabama, 

''Resolved^  That  the  Convention,  in  view  of  the  pres- 
ent circumstances  of  the  Country,  recognize  with 
peculiar  solemnity  the  duty  of  the  Church  towards 
the  people  of  the  African  race  within  our  borders,  and 
earnestly  urge  upon  the  ministry  and  laymen  of  the 
Church  increased  effort  for  the  spiritual  improvement 
of  this  people." 

The  Diocese  of  Alabama,  being  without  a  Bishop, 


44  THECHURCH 

had  applied  to  this  Convention  for  advice  as  to  the 
possibility  of  procuring  the  Consecration  of  a  Bishop 
before  the  ratification  and  adoption  of  the  proposed 
Constitution  and  Canons  of  the  Church  in  the  Con- 
federate States.  The  petition  was  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee consisting  of  the  three  senior  Bishops  present, 
Bishop  Meade,  Bishop  Otey,  and  Bishop  Elliott.  The 
report  made  by  this  committee  is  said  to  have  been 
written  by  Bishop  Meade,  and  is  rather  vague  and 
indecisive  in  dealing  with  the  very  important  questions 
involved.  Its  unsatisfactory  character  is  believed  to 
have  been  the  reason  why  it  was  passed  over  by  the 
Convention  without  any  action.  But  as  illustrating 
the  spirit  of  the  Convention,  and  its  temper  and  feeling 
in  approaching  this  matter,  its  purpose  in  connection 
with  what  has  sometimes  been  spoken  of  as  a  ''  Schis- 
matical  Consecration y"  a  few  lines  of  the  report  may  be 
quoted:  "All  the  Confederate  States,  by  the  goodness 
of  God,  possess  the  privilege  of  Episcopal  supervision  ex- 
cept Alabama.  The  ordinary  course  of  canonical  pro- 
ceedings for  the  election  and  Consecration  of  a  Bishop 
has  been  stopped  by  the  interruption  of  all  intercourse 
between  the  Northern  and  Southern  States  in  the  late 
Federal  Union.  This  interruption,  however,  of  social 
and  ecclesiastical  intercourse  between  brethren  of  the 
same  communion,  however  much  to  be  regretted,  has 
been  occasioned  by  circumstances  over  which  the 
Church  in  its  ecclesiastical  organization  has  had  no 
control,  and  it  is  still  highly  desirable  and  earnestly 
wished  that  the  *  unity  of  the  spirit'  be  preserved  by 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      45 

US  all  'in  the  bond  of  peace,'  and  that  that  same  spirit 
of  love  and  peace,  which  our  Lord  so  earnestly  incul- 
cated in  his  first  followers,  be  cultivated  and  cherished 
among  us."  The  report  goes  on  to  suggest  that  the 
Diocese  of  Alabama  should  proceed  in  the  usual 
manner  to  elect  a  successor  to  Bishop  Cobbs,  and  that 
the  result  of  such  choice  should  then  be  certified  in  the 
usual  course  to  the  Standing  Committees  and  the 
Bishops  of  the  Dioceses  within  the  Confederate  States, 
upon  whose  favorable  response  it  seemed  to  be  pre- 
sumed that  the  Presiding  Bishop  would  take  order  for 
the  Consecration  of  the  person  so  chosen  and  ap- 
proved. So  far  as  appears  in  the  printed  Journal,  no 
action  whatever  was  taken  on  this  report,  nor  was  the 
subject-matter  of  it  further  referred  to.  We  shall  see, 
however,  that  it  was  not  without  effect. 

The  Convention  before  adjourning,  upon  a  motion 
by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Wilmer, 

''Resolved,  That  this  Convention  recommend  to  the 
several  Dioceses  within  the  Confederate  States,  until 
more  permanent  action  can  be  taken,  the  provisional 
adoption  of  the  body  of  Canons  known  as  the  *  Canons 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States  of  America,'  so  far  as  they  are  not  in  conflict 
with  the  political  relations  of  the  Confederate  States, 
and  do  not  interfere  with  the  necessities  of  our 
condition." 

After  a  session  of  nine  days  this  second  general 
meeting  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States 
adjourned,  having  done  its  work  diligently,  faithfully, 


46  THECHURCH 

and  well.  So  far  as  can  be  judged  by  the  record,  and 
so  far  as  tradition  has  testified  of  their  words  and  of 
their  spirit,  it  is  hard  to  find  a  blemish  in  the  work  of 
those  patient  and  godly  men. 

It  was  not  until  about  the  beginning  of  the  year 
1862  that  the  War  became  very  real  to  us  in  the  South, 
or  its  pressure  very  apparent.  One  mark,  however, 
it  made  in  this  first  period  upon  the  Church.  One  of 
the  foremost  Bishops  of  the  South,  and  of  the  whole 
country,  was  absent  from  his  place  in  the  councils  of 
the  Church,  and  was  in  high  command  in  the  Confed- 
erate Army.  The  Bishop  of  Louisiana  came  of  a  race 
of  soldiers,  and,  after  leaving  the  University  of  North 
Carolina,  had  been  educated  at  the  Military  Academy 
at  West  Point.  Under  the  pressure  of  the  times,  and 
upon  the  threatened  invasion  of  his  country,  he  had 
felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  respond  to  the  call  made  upon 
him,  that  he  should  contribute  his  personal  service  in 
organizing  for  defence  against  invasion,  by  accepting 
an  important  position,  which  at  the  time  there  seemed 
no  one  else  at  hand  capable  of  filling.  This  was  his 
own  statement  of  the  case;  and  as  soon  as  the  emer- 
gency had  passed,  he  made  earnest  efforts  to  resign 
the  charge  and  to  lay  down  his  commission.  The 
authorities,  however,  declined  to  accept  his  resignation, 
and  much  pressure  w^as  brought  to  bear  upon  him  to 
dissuade  him  from  his  purpose  of  retiring;  and,  as  time 
went  on,  his  Diocese,  coming  more  and  more  into  the 
occupancy  of  the  enemy,  left  but  little  opportunity 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        47 

for  the  exercise  of  ordinary  episcopal  duty.  He 
therefore  continued  in  the  hard,  laborious,  and  self- 
sacrificing  service  of  the  field  and  the  camp  until  the 
tragic  end  at  Pine  Mountain,  June  14,  1804. 

By  all  testimonies  General  Polk's  influence  in  the 
army,  and  especially  among  the  general  oflScers,  was 
such  as  nobly  attested  his  character  and  the  reality  of 
the  qualities  best  becoming  his  position  in  the  Church. 
He  did  not  execute  any  holy  function  except  in  a  few 
cases  of  emergency,  but  his  humble  and  devout  at- 
tendance upon  services  and  sacraments,  and  his  unaf- 
fected holiness  of  life,  exerted  a  powerful  and  manifest 
influence  in  the  army  where  he  served.  The  highest 
oflScers  of  the  Army  of  Tennessee  were,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, brought  under  this  influence.  Many  of  them 
who  had  not  been  professedly  Christians  were  bap- 
tized and  confirmed.  A  striking  instance,  among 
others,  may  be  given  from  Bishop  Quintard's  personal 
narrative  of  his  own  eventful  career.  Speaking  of  an 
urgent  message  he  had  received  to  proceed  to  some 
distant  point  to  baptize  General  Hood,  he  says:  "It 
was  impossible  for  me  to  go,  but  it  was  a  great  pleasure 
for  me  to  learn  that  General  Polk  arrived  with  his 
staff  that  night,  and  baptized  his  brother  General. 
It  was  on  the  eve  of  an  expected  battle.  It  was  a 
touching  sight,  we  may  be  sure,  —  the  one-legged  vet- 
eran, leaning  upon  his  crutches  to  receive  the  waters 
of  Baptism  and  the  sign  of  the  Cross.  A  few  nights 
later  General  Polk  baptized  General  Johnston  and 
Lieutenant-General     Hardee,    General    Hood     being 


48  THECHURCH 

witness.  These  were  two  of  the  four  ecclesiastical 
acts  performed  by  Bishop  Polk  after  receiving  his 
commission  in  the  army." 

I  shall  not  attempt  any  discussion  of  Bishop  Polk's 
case.  So  far  as  his  character  and  the  purity  and  dis- 
interestedness of  his  motives  are  concerned,  he  needs 
no  defence.  In  general  it  is  admitted  that  the  obliga- 
tion of  the  Ordination  Vow  seems  to  shut  a  clergyman 
off  jrom  any  secular  calling,  from  that  of  a  soldier  as 
from  every  other.  Personally,  however,  I  have  no 
hesitation  in  saying  that  I  regard  the  hard,  unselfish, 
perilous,  self-sacrificing  life  of  a  soldier  in  the  camp  and 
in  the  field,  in  time  of  war,  as  far  less  inconsistent 
with  lofty  spiritual  attainments,  and  with  the  adequate 
illustration  of  the  very  highest  qualities  of  the  Chris- 
tian and  priestly  character,  than  indulgence  in  selfish 
ease,  and  personal  comfort,  and  all  the  relaxations  of 
an  easy  fortune,  which  few  of  us  fail  to  practise  when 
we  have  opportunity.  Let  it  be  admitted  that  the 
common  mind  and  conscience  of  the  Church  have 
realized  in  experience  that  to  bear  arms  is  inconsistent 
with  the  priestly  character.  Be  it  so!  But  let  the 
Christian  mind  and  conscience  go  on  and  realize  that 
many  other  things,  which  it  has  not  come  to  reprobate, 
are  still  more  deadly  to  the  spiritual  life  and  power  of 
the  clergy.  It  would  ill  become  us,  who  so  readily 
grasp  at  every  opportunity  of  personal  advantage, 
and  are  so  easily  persuaded  to  relax  the  rigidity  of 
self-denying  service,  and  so  early  retire  from  all  hard 
labors,     when    the    circumstances    of     our     worldly 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      49 

condition  allow  it  —  it  would  ill  become  us  to  condemn 
any  heroic  soul,  who  left  a  great  estate,  and  dignified 
ease,  and  domestic  endearments,  that  he  might  labor, 
and  suffer,  and  agonize,  and  die  at  the  call  of  duty  as 
he  heard  it.  God  grant  that  we,  fee})le  successors  of 
those  great  men,  may,  in  some  humble  way  and  in 
some  small  measure,  share  in  their  reward  at  the 
last  day!  ^ 

Though  the  Convention  of  October,  1861,  had  given 
no  reply  to  the  petition  of  the  Diocese  of  Alabama,  the 
suggestions  of  the  report  on  the  subject  were  followed, 
and  November  21  the  Rev.  Richard  Hooker  Wilmer, 
D.D.,  was  elected  Bishop  by  the  Convention  of  that 
Diocese.  This  election  was  certified  to  the  several 
Standing  Committees  of  the  Dioceses  within  the 
Confederate  States,  and  in  due  course  to  the  Bishops. 
Much  about  the  same  time  notifications  were  sent  out 
from  Pennsylvania  of  the  election  by  that  Diocese  of 
the  Rev.  William  Bacon  Stevens,  D.D.,  to  be  Assistant 
Bishop.  It  should  be  remembered  that  at  least  some 
of  the  Southern  Dioceses,  Virginia  and  North  Carolina, 
for  example,  had  not  at  this  time,  the  beginning  of 
1862,  taken  any  formal   action  towards  withdrawing 

^  For  a  noble  and  most  satisfactory  statement  and  vindication 
of  Bishop  Polk's  case,  see  Dr.  John  Fulton's  monograph  on  "The 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States,"  in  Bishop  Perry's  "  History  of  the 
American  Episcopal  Church."  Those  clergymen,  who  complacently 
quote  the  ancient  Canons  against  a  clergyman  bearing  arms,  seem 
happily  imaware  of  how  many  other  things  those  ancient  Canons 
deny  to  the  clergy. 
5 


50  THECHURCH 

from  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  The  most 
they  had  done  had  been  to  send  delegates  to  Columbia, 
to  confer  with  delegates  from  other  Dioceses  upon  the 
question.  These  delegates  had  agreed  that  separation 
should  take  place,  and  had  prepared  and  recommended 
a  Constitution  for  the  new  organization;  but  there  had 
been  no  meetings  as  yet  of  the  Diocesan  Conventions 
to  adopt  the  proposed  Constitution.  It  is  believed 
that  all  the  Standing  Committees,  which  took  action  at 
all,  declined  to  entertain  the  application  from  Penn- 
sylvania, and  gave  their  consent  to  the  Consecration 
of  Dr.  Wilmer  as  Bishop  of  Alabama.  And  the  Bishops, 
with  two  exceptions,  did  the  same.  These  two  were 
the  Bishop  of  Tennessee  and  the  Bishop  of  North 
Carolina.  Of  Bishop  Otey  we  only  know  that  he  in- 
dicated that  his  reasons  were  similar  to  those  alleged 
by  Bishop  Atkinson.  The  Bishop  of  North  Carolina 
has  left  on  record  his  view  of  the  case.  He  was  fully 
persuaded  of  the  expediency,  and  even  necessity,  of  a 
separate  and  independent  organization  of  the  Southern 
Dioceses,  by  reason  of  the  actual  situation  of  affairs. 
It  was  only  by  such  organization  that  the  Church  in 
the  South  could  do  the  work  crying  aloud  to  be  done. 
But  he  was  also  fully  persuaded  that  loyalty  to  Church 
principles,  and  therefore  regard  for  the  true  interests 
of  the  Church,  required  him  to  recognize  no  division 
or  separation  in  the  Church,  except  such  as  the  Church 
itself  should  have  recognized  and  sanctioned.  In  the 
beginning  of  the  year  1862  his  Diocese  had  not  with- 
drawn from  the  Church  in  the  United  States.     It  had 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      51 

contemplated  such  a  ste[)  as  imminent,  and  it  had 
endeavored  to  make  preparation  to  act  i)rudently  and 
wisely,  and  to  provide  for  the  just  and  proper  ordering 
of  the  new  ecclesiastical  body  which  should  l)e  formed. 
But  as  yet  it  had  not  withdrawn  from  its  old  connec- 
tion, nor  entered  into  any  new  relationships  to  take 
the  place  of  the  old.  Bishop  Atkinson  was  not  a  man 
who  could  think  one  way  and  act  another.  Alone, 
as  he  then  supposed,  among  Southern  Bishops  he 
gave  his  canonical  consent  to  the  Consecration  of  Dr. 
Stevens,  as  Assistant  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania,  and  de- 
clined to  consent  to  the  Consecration  of  Dr.  Wilmer  to 
be  Bishop  of  Alabama.  He  was  gratified  to  learn 
soon  afterwards  that  Bishop  Otey  had  taken  the  same 
course.  In  his  judgment  he  belonged  in  his  old  place 
until  he  had  formally  withdrawn  with  his  Diocese. 
The  proposed  Constitution  had  not  been  ratified  by 
his  Diocese  of  North  Carolina,  nor  by  any  of  the  Dio- 
ceses, so  that  Dr.  Wilmer  could  not  be  consecrated 
under  its  sanction;  and,  in  Bishop  Atkinson's  view,  the 
transmission  of  the  Apostolic  office  was  of  too  impor- 
tant and  sacred  a  character  to  be  transacted  without 
the  fullest  sanction  of  ecclesiastical  law,  especially 
when  the  only  reason  alleged  was  to  avoid  a  few 
months'  delay,  three  or  four  at  the  most.  The  gen- 
eral principle,  inherited  from  the  ancient  Church,  is 
that  no  Bishop  may  be  consecrated,  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  Bishop  of  the  Province,  thus  recognizing 
the  interest  of  the  Church  at  large  in  the  Episcopate. 
This  principle  has  had  different  applications  in  different 


52  THECHURCH 

ages  and  countries.  In  the  American  Church  its 
appHcation  is  seen  in  the  favorable  action  of  the  Gen- 
eral Convention,  or  of  the  Bishops  and  Standing 
Committees  during  the  recess  of  the  General  Con- 
vention, which  is  required  before  a  Bishop  can  be 
consecrated.  Bishop  Atkinson  felt  that,  in  the  situa- 
tion of  the  Southern  Dioceses,  it  was  specially  impor- 
tant to  observe  carefully  that  which  they  themselves 
recognized  as  the  law.  Within  a  few  months  the 
Constitution  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States 
would  be  in  force.  Until  it  should  be  adopted,  and 
until  he  and  his  Diocese  had  acceded  to  it  and  ratified 
it,  he  could  not  feel  at  liberty  to  act  under  its  provi- 
sions. Thus  feeling,  to  a  man  of  his  moral  and  intel- 
lectual quality,  there  was  only  one  course  open,  and 
that  course  he  followed. 

Bishop  Wilmer  was  consecrated  in  St.  Paul's 
Church,  Richmond,  March  6,  1862,  by  Bishops  Meade, 
Elliott,  and  Johns.  This  was  Bishop  Meade's  last 
official  act,  and  his  death  was  probably  hastened  by 
his  journey  to  Richmond  for  this  service,  and  by  the 
incidental  exposure  and  fatigue.  Eight  days  after  the 
Consecration  he  died.  He  had  been  consecrated  in 
1829,  and  had  played  a  very  great  and  honorable  part, 
both  in  the  life  of  the  Church  in  his  own  Diocese,  and 
in  the  history  of  the  Church  throughout  the  United 
States.  By  the  testimony  of  all  who  came  within  the 
sphere  of  his  personal  influence,  he  was  one  of  the 
greatest  characters  in  our  history.  Bishop  Atkinson, 
who  represented  almost  an  opposite  type  of  character 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES     53 

and  of  Churchmanship,  never  spoke  of  him  without 
the  strongest  expressions  of  admiration  and  reverence. 
In  his  Address  to  his  Convention  of  May,  1862,  is  the 
following  passage:  "I  have  already  alluded  to  the  loss 
we  have  lately  experienced  of  a  Bishop,  the  oldest  of 
our  communion  in  the  Confederate  States,  and  I  fully 
believe  one  of  the  wisest  and  best  of  all  Christendom. 
I  knew  him  long,  and  I  knew  him  well,  and  as  I  often 
differed  from  him  in  opinion,  I  can  bear  the  more 
emphatic  testimony  of  his  eminent  worth  —  I  have  not 
known,  no  one  of  this  generation,  I  believe,  has  known, 
a  man  superior  to  him  in  nobleness  of  nature,  in  the 
depth  and  power  of  religious  principle,  in  determined 
zeal  for  what  he  believed  truth  and  duty,  in  devotion 
to  his  Maker  and  his  Redeemer,  and,  as  subordinate 
to  these,  but  as  still  standing  very  high  in  his  affec- 
tions, to  the  Church  of  which  he  was  a  minister,  and 
the  country  of  which  he  was  a  citizen." 

The  late  Rev.  Dr.  Churchill  J.  Gibson  gives  us  the 
following  reminiscence  of  his  last  illness:  **It  w^as  my 
privilege  to  stand  at  his  bedside  until  he  became 
unconscious,  and  to  witness  his  last  interview  with 
General  Lee.  It  was  eminently  characteristic  of  the 
men.  Visitors  had  been  forbidden  by  the  doctors, 
but,  when  the  General  was  announced  as  having  called, 
the  Bishop  roused  himself,  and  said,  'I  must  see  him 
for  a  few  minutes.'  The  General  was  brought  in  by 
Bishop  Johns;  and,  grasping  warmly  the  extended 
hand,  he  said,  'Bishop,  how  do  you  feel?'  —  *I  am 
almost  gone,  but  I  wanted  to  see  you  once  more.'     He 


54  THECHURCH 

then  made  inquiries  about  the  members  of  his  family, 
Mrs.  Lee  by  name,  the  daughter  of  his  much  loved 
cousin  of  Arlington,  and  put  several  earnest,  eager 
questions  about  public  affairs  and  the  state  of  the 
army,  showing  the  liveliest  interest  in  the  success  of 
our  cause,  to  all  which  the  General  returned  brief  but 
satisfactory  answers.  He  then  said,  *God  bless  you! 
God  bless  you,  Robert,  and  fit  you  for  your  high  and 
responsible  position.  I  can't  call  you  General,  I  have 
heard  you  your  Catechism  so  often.'  *Yes,  Bishop,* 
said  the  General,  as  he  stooped  over  him  and  pressed 
his  hand  tenderly  (and  I  think  I  saw  a  tear  drop), 
*very  often.'  Again  our  dying  Bishop  shook  his  hand 
warmly,  and  said,  *  Heaven  bless  you!  Heaven  bless 
you,  and  give  you  wisdom  for  your  important  and 
arduous  duties.'  The  General  then  slowly  withdrew." 
Bishop  Meade  died  on  the  fourteenth  of  March.  He 
was  taken  away  in  love  and  mercy,  that  his  eyes  might 
not  see  the  desolations  of  his  Diocese  and  the  sufferings 
of  the  people  whom  he  loved. 

Within  a  few  months  after  Bishop  Wilmer's  Con- 
secration, the  Constitution  of  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States  was  adopted  by  the  Dioceses  of 
Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Georgia, 
Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Texas.  Similar  action  was 
taken  by  Arkansas  in  November,  1862,  and  by  Florida 
in  December,  18G3.  The  Dioceses  of  Tennessee  and 
Louisiana  were  unable  to  hold  any  Diocesan  Conven- 
tions until  after  the  close  of  the  War,  and  so  never 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      55 

became  formally  united  with  the  Church  in  the  Con- 
federate States.  Indeed,  the  Standing  Committee  of 
the  Diocese  of  Tennessee,  which  managed  to  keep 
up  its  organization,  did  on  October  3,  1804,  by  giv- 
ing canonical  consent  to  the  Consecration  of  the  Rev. 
Thomas  H.  Vail  to  be  Bishop  of  Kansas,  recognize 
the  continuance  of  their  connection  with  the  Church 
in  the  United  States. 

September  27,  1862,  Bishop  Elliott  issued  to  the 
Bishops,  clergy,  and  laity  of  the  Protestant' Episcopal 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States  a  ''Declaration  and 
Summons,^'  reciting  in  full  the  Constitution  proposed 
by  the  Convention  of  October,  1861,  and  announcing 
the  fact  of  its  ratification  and  adoption  by  the  Dioceses 
of  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Georgia, 
Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Texas.  As  senior  Bishop, 
in  accordance  with  the  Third  Article  of  said  Con- 
stitution, he  summoned  the  first  "General  Council" 
of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  to  meet 
in  Augusta,  Georgia,  on  the  second  Wednesday 
of  November  following. 

On  the  day  appointed  the  Council  met  in  St.  Paul's 
Church,  Augusta.  Bishops  Elliott,  Johns,  Davis, 
Atkinson,  Lay,  and  Wilmer  were  present.  Bishop 
Green  appeared  the  second  day,  but  appeared  no  more 
in  his  place  during  the  session,  being  confined  to  his 
bed  with  a  severe  attack  of  pneumonia.  During  the 
session  thirty  clerical  and  lay  deputies  represented 
seven  Dioceses,  Texas  being  unrepresented,  but 
Arkansas  being  admitted  as  a  Diocese  on  the  eighth 


56  THECHURCH 

day.  Bishop  Gregg  and  his  Diocese  were  cut  off  by 
the  hostile  occupation  of  the  Mississippi  River.  Ten- 
nessee, Louisiana,  and  Florida  had  not  ratified  the 
Constitution,  as  has  been  seen.  The  Rev.  Christian 
Hanckle,  D.D.,  of  South  Carolina,  was  elected  Presi- 
dent of  the  House  of  Deputies,  and  the  Rev.  John  M. 
Mitchell,  of  Alabama,  was  made  secretary.  The  Rev. 
W.  H.  Harrison,  of  Georgia,  was  chosen  secretary  of 
the  House  of  Bishops. 

This  General  Council,  of  November  12-22,  1862, 
was  the  only  one  which  met  during  the  short  life 
of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States.  Its  time 
was  almost  wholly  given  to  the  uninteresting  but 
necessary  work  of  enacting  a  body  of  Canons  for  the 
routine  government  and  administration  of  the  Church. 
As  in  the  case  of  the  Constitution,  this  work  was  in 
effect  only  to  recast,  with  some  small  changes  and 
improvements,  the  Canons  under  which  the  Dioceses 
had  already  been  living.  The  whole  Canon  Law  of 
the  General  Convention  had  been  codified  at  Richmond 
in  October,  1859.  The  changes  made  in  adapting  this 
code  to  the  necessities  of  the  new  organization  were 
not  great,  and  do  not  demand  our  detailed  examina- 
tion. It  has  been  said,  by  persons  very  competent 
to  judge  of  such  matters,  that  the  Canons  were  some- 
what simplified,  improved  in  some  details,  and  reduced 
to  a  better  and  more  convenient  order.  Perhaps  the 
most  important  change  was  the  omission  of  the  Canon, 
"Of  the  use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer."  This 
Canon,  adopted  in  1832,  remained  among  the  Canons 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        57 

of  our  General  Convention  until  tlie  revision  accom- 
plished in  1904?.  In  the  report  of  the  committee  to 
the  General  Council  of  18C2  this  Canon  was  brought 
forward  under  an  enlarged  and  very  much  improved 
form,  providing  for  great  freedom  and  variety  in  the 
use  of  the  services  of  the  Prayer  Book,  in  such  Dioceses 
as  should  authorize  the  same  "by  the  vote  of  a  majority 
of  both  Clergy  and  Laity,"  and  expressly  recognizing 
the  authority  of  the  Bishops  of  the  several  Dioceses, 
to  "provide  such  special  services  as,  in  their  judgment, 
shall  be  required  by  the  peculiar  spiritual  necessities  of 
any  class  or  portion  of  the  population"  of  the  Diocese. 
This  was  a  distinct  improvement  on  the  rigidity  of  the 
old  Canon,  but  it  does  not  seem  to  have  been  considered 
in  the  Council.  The  Committee  on  Canons  of  the 
Deputies  did  not  report  it,  nor  does  it  seem  to  have 
been  brought  up  in  the  House  of  Bishops.  The  whole 
subject  of  the  use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
was  omitted  from  the  Canons,  and  the  Prayer  Book, 
as  the  Church's  law  and  standard  of  worship,  was 
left  to  rest  upon  the  constitutional  provision  that  this 
book  should  be  used  in  those  Dioceses  which  should 
adopt  the  Constitution.  In  line  with  this  was  the 
omission  of  the  section  in  the  old  Digest  giving  canon- 
ical expression  to  the  rubrical  direction  as  to  repelling 
unworthy  persons  from  the  Holy  Communion.  The 
evident  intention  was,  not  to  impair  the  high  position 
and  authority  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  by 
making  it  appear  that  its  regulations  needed  to  be 
confirmed  and  enforced  by  canonical  sanctions.     It 


58  THECHURCH 

was  not  until  forty -two  years  later  that  the  Church  in 
the  United  States  came  to  see  the  wisdom  and  the 
logical  consistency  of  this  course.  The  revision  accom- 
plished at  Boston  in  1904  puts  the  authority  of  the 
Prayer  Book  upon  the  same  constitutional  ground,  and 
omits  all  canonical  enforcement  of  its  use.  Perhaps  it 
was  this  same  principle,  of  recognizing  in  the  Prayer 
Book  our  only  law  and  directory  of  public  worship, 
which  explains  the  further  omission,  from  the  legisla- 
tion of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States,  of  the 
Canon  upon  the  Observance  of  the  Lord's  Day,  or 
Sunday,  which  our  own  Digest  still  retains. 

Turning  now  to  the  practical  work  of  the  Church, 
it  is  interesting  and  gratifying  to  see  how  the  Council, 
placed  in  so  perilous  a  position,  in  the  midst  of  the 
most  tremendous  and  fateful  war  of  modern  times, 
addressed  itself  to  the  demands  of  the  situation. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  first  of  all,  that  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States  did  not  make  its  slender  resources, 
and  the  overwhelming  urgency  of  its  domestic  duties, 
a  plea  for  contracting  its  sympathies  or  narrowing 
the  bounds  of  its  spiritual  horizon;  nor  did  it  desire 
to  limit  its  work  within  its  own  diminishing  territory. 
There  is  something  truly  pathetic,  as  well  as  brave  and 
noble,  in  the  way  in  which  it  vainly  tried  to  claim  its 
part  in  the  work  of  the  Master  in  the  distant  field  of 
Foreign  Missions,  from  which,  in  the  language  of  the 
Pastoral  Letter,  "the  policy  of  man  had  shut"  it  off. 
To  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  the  State  of  the 
Church  were  appended  the  following  Resolutions,  which 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        59 

the  House  of  Deputies  adopted,  as  setting  forth  the 
position  of  the  Church: 

"1.  Resolved,  That  the  Church  in  this  its  first 
General  Council,  would  solemnly  recognize,  before 
the  Church  universal  and  the  world,  a  divine  obliga- 
tion to  engage  in  Missionary  labor  coextensive  with 
the  limits  of  fallen  humanity. 

"2.  Resolved,  That  this  Church  desires  specially  to 
recognize  its  obligation  to  provide  for  the  spiritual 
wants  of  that  class  of  our  brethren,  who  in  the  provi- 
dence of  God  have  been  committed  to  our  sympathy 
and  care  in  the  national  institution  of  slavery. 

"3.  Resolved,  That  whilst  at  all  times  a  devout  rec- 
ognition of  our  dependence  on  the  spirit  of  all  grace 
is  proper,  this  first  Council  of  the  Church  is  a  most 
fitting  time  and  place  to  make  special  and  public 
acknowledgment  of  the  same;  to  encourage  among 
our  members  the  cherishing  in  increased  degree  of  an 
habitual  sense  of  His  presence  and  power;  and  humbly 
and  earnestly  to  commit  to  His  presiding  influence  the 
being,  the  doings,  and  the  whole  future  history  of  this 
Church,  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

The  treasurers  who  had  been  appointed  for  Domes- 
tic and  Foreign  Missions  in  July,  1861,  presented  their 
reports.  Mr.  Henry  Trescott,  for  Foreign  Missions, 
reported  funds  collected,  and  several  remittances 
made  to  Bishop  Payne  in  Africa,  Bishop  Boone  in 
China,  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hill  in  Athens.  But  he 
reported  also  that  no  acknowledgment  of  his  last 
remittances  had  been  received,  and  the  rate  of  exchange 


60  THECHURCH 

and  the  increased  risks  of  transmission  had  prevented 
further  remittances  being  made.  The  blockade  of 
Southern  ports  was  cutting  off  the  Confederate  States 
from  intercourse  with  the  rest  of  the  world.  Mr.  J.  K. 
Sass,  Treasurer  for  Domestic  Missions,  reported  sev- 
eral thousand  dollars  contributed,  mostly  for  the 
work  of  Bishop  Lay  and  of  Bishop  Gregg.  The 
Council  devolved  the  work  of  Foreign  and  Domestic 
Missions  upon  the  House  of  Bishops,  as  the  natural 
missionary  leaders  of  the  Church,  providing  that  the 
Bishops  should  appoint  three  of  their  number  to  act 
as  a  Board  of  Missions,  administering  the  whole  busi- 
ness, and  reporting  to  the  House  of  Bishops  at  the 
triennial  General  Council.  This  committee  was  spe- 
cially charged  with  the  "prosecuting  of  Foreign 
Missions  so  far  as  it  may  be  able, "  but,  until  communi- 
cations could  be  opened  with  foreign  countries,  all 
moneys  "which  have  been,  or  may  be  hereafter,  con- 
tributed for  this  object,  shall  be  securely  invested." 
In  the  Pastoral  Letter  put  out  by  the  Bishops  at  the 
end  of  this  Council,  one  of  the  noblest  utterances 
ever  put  forth  by  the  Church  of  Christ  in  modern  times, 
the  Bishops  refer  to  the  subject  of  Foreign  Missions: 
"Voices  of  supplication  come  to  us  also  from  the 
distant  shores  of  Africa  and  the  East,  but  only  their 
echo  reaches  us  from  the  throne  of  grace.  The  policy 
of  man  has  shut  out  those  utterances  from  us,  .  .  . 
but  we  can  hear  them  when  we  kneel  in  prayer,  and 
commune  with  their  spirits  through  the  spirit  of 
Christ.     But    God    is    perchance    intending    through 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        61 

these  inscrutable  measures,  to  shut  us  up  to  that 
great  work  which  He  has  placed  at  our  doors,  and 
which  is,  next  to  her  own  expansion,  the  Church's 
greatest  work  in  these  Confederate  States.  Tlie 
rehgious  instruction  of  the  negroes  has  been  thrust 
upon  us  in  such  a  wonderful  manner,  that  we  must 
be  blind  not  to  perceive  that  not  only  our  spiritual 
but  our  national  life  is  wrai)pcd  up  in  their  welfare. 
With  them  we  stand  or  fall,  and  God  will  not  permit 
us  to  be  separated  in  interest  or  in  fortune."  Then 
follows  a  long  and  striking  passage,  urging  upon  all 
members  of  the  Church  their  duty  in  regard  to  this 
"sacred  trust  committed  to  us,  as  a  people,  to  be 
prepared  for  the  work  which  God  may  have  for  them 
to  do  in  the  future,'*  and  specially  urging  "upon  the 
masters  of  the  country  their  obligation,  as  Christian 
men,  so  to  arrange  this  institution  as  not  to  necessitate 
the  violation  of  those  sacred  relations  which  God  has 
created,  and  which  man  cannot,  consistently  with 
Christian  duty,  annul." 

In  their  Pastoral  the  Bishops  also  call  attention  to 
the  camps  and  hospitals,  into  which  were  crowded  so 
many  thousands  of  the  men  and  youths  of  the  South: 
"And  we  would  urge  it  upon  those  ministers  who  have 
been  exiled  from  their  parishes,  to  enter  upon  this 
work  as  their  present  duty,  trusting  for  support  to 
Him  Who  has  said,  '  I  will  never  leave  thee  nor  forsake 
thee.'" 

The  General  Council  of  1862  took  action  in  regard 
to  the  Prayer  Book,  directing  the  substitution  of  the 


62  THECHURCH 

word  "  Confederate  "  in  the  place  of  "  United, "  wherever 
that  word  occurs  in  the  name  of  the  Church,  and  the 
word  "Council"  in  the  place  of  "Convention"  for 
the  legislative  body  of  the  Dioceses  and  for  the  general 
triennial  meeting.  It  also  directed  that  a  Declaration 
of  its  Ratification  and  Adoption  by  the  General  Council 
of  November,  1862,  should  be  prefixed.  A  committee, 
however,  was  appointed  to  report  to  the  next  General 
Council  such  alterations  as  should  be  deemed  pioper, 
with  a  proviso  that  "such  alterations  involve  no  change 
in  the  Doctrine  or  DiscipUne  of  this  Church."  The 
committee  was  authorized  to  publish  an  edition  of 
the  Prayer  Book  for  present  use;  "And  also,  in  order 
to  supply  in  part  the  urgent  need  of  copies  of  the 
Prayer  Book  for  our  Soldiers  and  Sailors,  a  selection 
of  such  portions  thereof  as  are  used  in  public  worship." 
It  is  worth  noticing  that  in  resolutions  introduced 
by  Bishop  Atkinson,  and  apparently  urged  by  him  in 
the  "Committee  on  the  Bible  and  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,"  of  which  he  was  chairman,  it  was  provided 
that  the  committee,  which  should  be  charged  with 
bringing  out  the  edition  of  the  Prayer  Book  authorized 
by  this  Council,  should  "prepare  a  preface  for  said 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  to  be  submitted  to  the  next 
General  Council,  and,  if  approved  by  it,  to  be  prefixed 
to  said  Book."  This,  though  adopted  by  the  House  of 
Bishops,  was  thrown  out  by  the  Joint  Committee  of 
both  Houses,  who  brought  in  the  report  as  finally 
adopted.  One  can  hardly  help  conjecturing  that 
Bishop  Atkinson  may  have  had  in  mind  the  statement 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        63 

in  the  Preface  as  to  the  "ecclesiastical  independence'* 
of  the  Church  being  "necessarily  included"  in  the  civil 
and  political  independence  of  the  Thirteen  Colonies. 

The  Committee  on  the  State  of  the  Church  suggested 
the  preparation  of  a  Pastoral  Letter,  and  in  the 
House  of  Bishops,  the  Bishops  of  Georgia,  Virginia, 
and  North  Carolina  were  appointed  to  prepare  such 
a  letter.^  Passages  relating  to  missionary  work  have 
already  been  given  from  it.  Its  unique  excellence 
tempts  me  to  make  larger  extracts.  Dr.  Fulton,  in 
his  admirable  article  in  the  second  volume  of  Bishop 
Perry's  "History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church," 
thus  speaks  of  it:  "The  Pastoral  Letter  of  the  House 
of  Bishops  at  the  Council  in  Augusta  will  never  cease 
to  be  precious  to  the  Church  of  God.  It  is  the  noblest 
epitaph  of  the  dead,  and,  if  they  needed  such,  it  is  the 
noblest  vindication  of  the  living,  that  their  dearest 
friends  could  wish."  It  sets  forth  strongly,  yet  with 
tender  sympathy  and  with  broad  charity,  the  position, 
the  spirit,  and  the  duty  of  the  Church  in  that  trying 
day: 

"Seldom  has  any  Council  assembled  in  the  Church 
of  Christ  under  circumstances  needing  His  presence 
more  urgently  than  this  which  is  now  about  to  submit 
its  conclusions  to  the  judgment  of  the  Universal 
Church.  Forced  by  the  providence  of  God  to  separate 
ourselves  from  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in 
the  United  States,  a  Church  with  whose  doctrines, 
discipline,  and  worship  we  are  in  entire  harmony,  and 
^  It  is  understood  to  have  been  written  by  Bishop  EUiott. 


64  THECHURCH 

with  whose  action,  up  to  the  time  of  that  separation, 
we  were  abundantly  satisfied,  at  a  moment  when  civil 
strife  had  dipped  its  foot  in  blood,  and  civil  war  was 
desolating  our  homes  and  firesides,  we  required  a 
double  measure  of  grace  to  preserve  the  accustomed 
moderation  of  the  Church  in  the  arrangement  of  our 
organic  law,  in  the  adjustment  of  our  code  of  canons, 
but  above  all  in  the  preservation,  without  change,  of 
those  rich  treasures  of  doctrine  and  worship,  which 
have  come  to  us  enshrined  in  our  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  Cut  off  likewise  from  all  communication  with 
our  Sister  Churches  of  the  world,  we  have  been  com- 
pelled to  act  without  any  interchange  of  opinion  even 
with  our  Mother  Church,  and  alone  and  unaided  to 
arrange  for  ourselves  the  organization  under  which 
we  should  do  our  part  in  carrying  on  to  their  consum- 
mation the  purposes  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus.  We  trust 
that  the  spirit  of  Christ  hath  indeed  so  directed, 
sanctified,  and  governed  us  in  our  work,  that  we  shall 
be  approved  by  all  those  who  love  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  in  sincerity  and  in  truth,  and  who  are  earnest 
in  preparing  the  world  for  His  coming  in  glorious 
majesty  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead. 

"The  Constitution  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States,  under  which  we 
have  been  exercising  our  legislative  functions,  is  the 
same  as  that  of  the  Church  from  which  we  have  been 
providentially  separated,  save  that  we  have  introduced 
into  it  a  germ  of  expansion  which  was  wanting  in  the 
old  Constitution.    ... 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        ()5 

"The  Canon  law,  which  has  been  adopted  during 
our  present  session,  is  altogether  in  its  spirit,  and 
almost  in  its  letter,  identical  with  that  under  which 
we  have  hitherto  prospered.  .  .    . 

"The  Prayer  Book  we  have  left  untouched  in  every 
particular,  save  where  a  change  of  our  civil  govern- 
ment, and  the  formation  of  a  new  nation,  have  made 
alteration  essentially  requisite.  Three  words  comprise 
all  the  amendment  which  has  been  deemed  necessary 
in  the  present  emergency.  .  .  .  We  give  you  back 
your  Book  of  Common  Prayer  the  same  as  you  have 
intrusted  it  to  us,  believing  that  if  it  has  slight  defects, 
their  removal  had  better  be  the  gradual  work  of 
experience  than  the  hasty  action  of  a  body  convened 
almost  upon  the  outskirts  of  a  camp.  .  .  . 

"These  striking  encouragements  vouchsafed  to  us 
from  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  should  fill 
our  hearts  with  earnest  devotedness,  and  should  lead 
us  even  now  to  enquire, 'Lord,  what  wilt  thou  have  us  to 
do?'  And  the  answer  to  this  question  will  lead  us, your 
Chief  Pastors,  to  specify  the  points  to  which  our  efforts 
as  a  Christian  Church,  should  be  specially  directed.  .  .  . 

"Christ  has  founded  His  Church  upon  love  —  for 
God  is  love.  .  .  .  This  was  His  especial  command- 
ment, *A  new  commandment  give  I  unto  you,  that 
ye  love  one  another.*  And  this  is  truly  not  only  the 
new  commandment,  but  the  summary  of  all  the  com- 
mandments. The  whole  Gospel  is  redolent  with  it, 
with  a  broad,  comprehensive,  all-embracing  love, 
appointed,  like  Aaron's  rod,  to  swallow  up  all  the  other 
6 


66  THECHURCH 

Christian  graces,  and  to  manifest  the  spiritual  glory 
of  God  in  Christ.  A  Church  without  love!  What 
could  you  augur  of  a  Church  of  God  without  faith,  or 
a  Church  of  Christ  without  hope?  But  love  is  higher 
grace  than  either  faith  or  hope,  and  its  absence  from 
a  Church  is  just  the  absence  of  the  very  life-blood 
from  the  body. 

"Our  first  duty,  therefore,  as  the  children  of  God, 
is  to  send  forth  from  this  Council  our  greetings  of  love 
to  the  Churches  of  God  all  the  world  over.  We  greet 
them  in  Christ,  and  rejoice  that  they  are  partakers 
with  us  of  all  the  grace  which  is  treasured  up  in  Him. 
We  lay  down  today  before  the  altar  of  the  Crucified 
all  our  burdens  of  sin,  and  offer  our  prayers  for  the 
Church  INIilitant  upon  earth.  Whatever  may  be  their 
aspect  towards  us  politically,  w^e  cannot  forget  that 
they  rejoice  with  us  in  the  one  Lord,  the  one  Faith, 
the  one  Baptism,  the  one  God  and  Father  of  all; 
and  we  wish  them  God-speed  in  all  the  sacred  ministries 
of  the  Church.  Nothing  but  love  is  consonant  ^^th 
the  exhibition  of  Christ's  love  which  is  manifested 
in  His  Church,  and  any  note  of  man's  bitterness, 
except  against  sin,  would  be  a  sound  of  discord  mingling 
with  the  sweet  harmonies  of  earth  and  heaven.  We 
rejoice  in  this  golden  cord,  which  binds  us  together 
in  Christ  our  Redeemer,  and  like  the  ladder  which 
Jacob  saw  in  vision,  with  the  angels  of  God  ascending 
and  descending  upon  it,  may  it  ever  be  the  channel 
along  which  shall  flash  the  Christian  greeting  of  the 
children  of  God. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        G7 

"But  while  we  send  forth  this  love  to  the  whole 
Church  Militant  upon  earth,  let  us  not  forget  that 
special  love  is  due  by  us  towards  those  of  our  own 
household.  To  us  have  been  committed  the  treasures 
of  the  Church,  and  those  of  our  own  kindred  and  lineage, 
who  have  sprung  from  our  loins  both  naturally  and 
spiritually,  who  are  now  united  with  us  in  a  sacred 
conflict  for  the  dearest  rights  of  man,  ask  us  for  the 
bread  of  life.  They  pray  us  for  that  which  we  are 
commanded  to  give,  the  Gospel  of  the  grace  of  God. 
They  put  in  no  claim  for  anything  worldly,  for  any- 
thing alien  from  the  mission  of  the  Church.  Their 
petition  is  that  we  will  fulfil  the  very  purpose  of  our 
institution,  and  give  them  the  means  of  grace.  Every 
claim  which  man  can  have  upon  his  fellow-man  they 
have  upon  us,  and  having  these  claims  they  ask  only 
for  the  Church.  They  pray  us  not  to  let  them  perish 
in  the  wilderness;  not  to  permit  them  to  be  cut  off 
from  the  sweet  communion  of  the  Church.  .  .  . 

"Many  of  the  States  of  this  Confederacy  are  Mis- 
sionary ground.  The  population  is  sparse  and  scat- 
tered; the  children  of  the  Church  are  few  and  far 
between;  the  Priests  of  the  Lord  can  reach  them  only 
after  great  labor  and  privation.  .  .  .  Unless  we  take 
care  that  the  Gospel  is  sent  to  these  isolated  children 
of  the  Church,  who  wdll  heed  their  cry?  They  have 
no  Church  to  cry  to,  but  the  Church  w^hich  w^e  now 
represent,  and  they  cast  themselves  upon  us  in  full 
faith  that  we  will  do  our  whole  duty  towards  them. 
They  are  one  with  us  in  faith,  and  care,  and  suffering; 


68  THECHURCH 

they  are  bearing  like  evils  with  those  which  disturb 
us,  and  they  have  no  worship  to  cheer  and  support 
them,  no  Gospel  to  preach  to  them  patience  and  long- 
suffering.  For  Christ's  sake  they  pray  that  they  may 
be  given  at  least  a  Mother's  bosom  to  die  upon.  .  .  . 
*'And  now  it  only  remains  for  us  to  bid  you,  one  and 
all,  an  affectionate  farewell.  .  .  .  May  God's  gracious 
Providence  guide  you  in  safety  to  your  homes,  and 
preserve  them  from  the  desolations  of  war.  And 
should  we  not  be  permitted  to  battle  together  any 
more  for  Christ  in  the  Church  Militant,  may  we  be 
deemed  worthy  to  be  members  of  the  Church  Trium- 
phant, where  with  prophets,  apostles,  martyrs,  saints, 
and  angels,  we  may  ascribe  honor  and  glory,  dominion 
and  praise,  to  Him  that  sitteth  upon  the  Throne, 
and  to  the  Lamb,  forever!" 


in 

CHURCH  WORK  IN  THE  ARMY  ;  SOME  CONFEDERATE 
CHAPLAINS;  RELIGIOUS  READING  FOR  THE  SOL- 
DIERS; THE  "CHURCH  INTELLIGENCER";  THE 
CONFEDERATE   PRAYER   BOOK. 

The  history  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States  is  brief,  but  it  is  full  of  tragic  interest,  if  we 
could  but  recover  it.  And  in  no  part  does  the  life  of 
those  times  shine  out  with  more  blessed  and  benign 
influence  than  in  the  religious  history  of  the  Confederate 
armies.  It  has  been  said  that  no  army  since  that  of 
Cromwell  has  been  so  distinctly  and  sincerely  religious 
as  the  *'Army  of  Northern  Virginia."  And  it  is  no 
unworthy  partiality  which  claims  that  the  Confederate 
soldier  was  free  from  the  evil  element  of  fanaticism 
and  ferocity,  which  to  so  great  an  extent  vitiated  and 
degraded  the  religion  of  Cromwell's  Ironsides.  For 
in  truth  the  Christianity  of  the  Confederate  camp 
and  bivouac  and  battlefield  was  not  the  product  of 
the  segregated  and  unnatural  life  of  the  soldier.  It 
was  simply  the  religion  of  family  altar,  and  home 
circle,  and  parish  church,  and  country  meeting-house, 
carried  by  father  and  son,  and  brother  and  friend, 
from  home  into  the  army.  Never  in  any  other  modern 
war  has  the  whole  male  population  of  a  country,  from 
seventeen  to  fifty  years  of  age,  been  transported  bodily 
into  the  camp  and  the  field.     And  to  a  great  extent 

C9 


70  THECHURCH 

the  same  moral  atmosphere  and  the  same  reHgious 
standards  prevailed  in  the  army  to  which  the  soldiers 
had  been  accustomed  at  home.  There  was  doubtless 
enough  of  sin  and  wickedness,  as  there  is  more  than 
enough  in  the  best  ordered  society,  but  the  Confederate 
Army  was  no  scene  of  relaxed  morals  and  licensed 
ungodliness.  A  distinguished  clergyman  of  the  Church, 
who  entered  the  Confederate  Army  in  1861  as  second 
lieutenant,  and  rose  to  the  command  of  his  regiment 
in  Lee's  army,  who  took  Holy  Orders  in  1877,  and 
served  as  regimental  chaplain  through  the  Spanish- 
American  War  of  1898,  writes:^  *'In  regard  to  the 
religious  condition  of  the  Army  of  Northern  Virginia 
during  the  war,  so  far  as  my  observation  extended, 
I  saw  but  little  difference,  if  any,  from  what  they  were 
at  home  before  and  since  the  war.  In  fact  I  should 
say  there  was  rather  more  piety  manifested  by  the 
soldiers  during  the  w^ar  than  by  the  same  young  men 
before,  and  decidedly  more,  I  believe,  than  prevails 
among  the  mass  of  young  men  today.  I  was  painfully 
impressed  with  the  contrast  between  the  Confederate 
soldiers  and  the  Volunteers  in  the  Spanish-xlmerican 
War.  I  seldom  heard  an  oath  in  the  Confederate 
camps,-  and  I  had   every   opportunity,  from  second 

^  The  Rev.  Edwin  A.  Osborne,  Archdeacon  of  Charlotte,  Colonel 
of  the  Fourth  Regiment  N.  C.  Troops  in  the  Confederate  Army,  and 
Chaplain  of  the  Second  Regiment  N.  C.  Volunteers  in  the  Spanish- 
American  War. 

2  As  these  pages  are  going  through  the  press  the  following 
extract  is  made  from  a  communication  in  a  Southern  newspaper, 
over   the  signature  of  a  distinguished   Presbyterian   minister,  the 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        71 

lieutenant  to  the  command  of  the  regiment.  Our 
camps  often  resounded  at  night  with  hymns  and 
spiritual  songs;  and  arrests  for  drunkenness  were  very 
rare.  My  own  company  from  North  Iredell  numbered 
two  hundred  and  forty  men  all  told  during  the  war, 
and  I  do  not  remember  a  single  arrest  among  my  men, 
except  for  one  or  two  old-fashioned  'fisticuffs';  and 
profanity  was  seldom  heard.  In  the  winter  of  18G3-4! 
a   very    remarkable    religious   revival   swept   through 

Rev.  James  Power  Smith,  who  as  a  young  man  served  on  the  staff 
of  Stonewall  Jackson  and  of  General  Richard  E.  Ewell.  His  com- 
munication is  a  protest  against  a  popular  novelist's  representation 
of  Confederate  officers  as  using  profane  language  in  their  ordi- 
nary conversation.  He  writes:  "  The  frequent  introduction  of 
profane  language  is  much  to  be  regretted.  These  things  are 
not  necessary  to  the  story,  and  not  to  any  such  extent  true 
to  history.  They  are  to  be  regretted  in  a  book  to  be  read  by 
many  of  our  boys,  as  not  just  to  the  character  of  their  fathers. 
The  gentlemanly  behavior  of  officers  of  all  ranks  repressed  any 
such  habits  when  they  came  into  the  army.  The  few  men  of 
prominence  who  were  known  to  be  profane  in  speech,  in  times 
of  excitement  and  passion,  themselves  felt  the  repression  of  the 
noble  men  of  character  and  piety  who  were  their  leaders,  and  in 
later  years  they  left  the  bad  habit  behind  them. 

"  General  Richard  E.  Ewell,  Jackson's  trusted  division  commander, 
and  his  successor  in  command  of  the  Second  Corps,  is  represented  " 
[by  the  novelist]  "as  frequently  uttering  profane  oaths.  One  who 
after  Jackson's  death  served  on  the  staff  of  General  Ewell,  and 
was  in  intimate  personal  contact  with  him,  is  ready  to  testify  that 
he  never  heard  him  utter  an  oath,  but  knew  him  as  a  Christian 
gentleman,  reverent,  devout,  and  free  from  any  habit  of  profanity. 
Losing  a  leg  at  Second  Manassas,  he  was  for  some  time  an  invalid 
in  Richmond,  during  which  time  he  made  a  profession  of  Christ, 
from  which  he  never  declined.  There  may  be  those  in  Richmond 
who  yet  remember  the  day  when  General  Ewell  went  up  the  aisle 
of  St.  Paul's  Church  on  his  crutches  and  was  confirmed." 


72  THECHURCH 

the  army,  and  thousands  of  conversions  occurred. 
The  army  reminded  me  of  regular  camp-meeting  while 
in  winter  quarters,  and  even  on  bivouac.  Religious 
exercises  were  generally  w^ell  attended  by  officers  and 
men,  without  any  compulsion,  on  week-days  as  well 
as  on  Sundays,  and  the  moral  and  religious  atmosphere 
in  the  camp  was  good,  remarkably  so,  as  I  remember 
it.  How  could  it  be  otherwise,  with  our  noble  citizen 
soldiery,  and  the  examples  set  before  them  by  such 
men  as  Lee  and  Jackson  at  their  head.^^  As  for  camp- 
followers  and  lewd  women,  they  were  so  rare  that  I 
do  not  remember  seeing  any  of  the  latter  but  once, 
and  then  they  were  being  carried  beyond  the  reach  of 
the  army  under  a  military  escort;  and  there  was  nothing 
to  attract  the  former,  so  far  as  I  can  remember,  after 
the  winter  of  1861-2,  when  there  were  some  few  around 
Manassas  Junction. 

"Most  of  our  men  had  small  copies  of  the  Bible  or 
New  Testament  when  they  left  home;  and  many  of 
them  could  be  seen  reading  them  when  *at  rest'  on 
the  march,  or  in  the  camp  when  off  duty. 

"This  may  seem  somewhat  exaggerated,  but  it  is 
as  I  remember  it.  Anything  like  profanity  or  im- 
morality was  very  offensive  and  painful  to  me  always; 
and  I  was  seldom  shocked  during  the  war  by  any  open 
manifestation  of  such  a  spirit  among  our  soldiers. 
I  do  remember  a  very  few  instances  on  the  part  of 
individuals  that  were  painful  and  disgusting,  and  I 
would  certainly  have  been  impressed  if  such  had  been 
anyways  general." 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        73 

This  testimony  of  a  brave  and  godly  soldier,  given 
from  memory  after  the  lapse  of  more  than  forty  years, 
is  confirmed  by  the  contemporary  evidence  of  a  faith- 
ful chaplain,  the  Rev.  Frederick  Fitzgerald,  in  his 
report  to  his  Bishop,  as  published  in  the  Journal  of 
the  Diocese  of  North  Carolina  for  the  year  1863. 
He  writes:  "I  have  perceived  a  constant  and  real 
improvement  in  the  moral  and  religious  character  of 
our  soldiers  since  the  first  nine  months  of  the  war. 
I  believe  that  there  is  far  less  of  vice  of  every  kind  in 
our  army  than  there  was  one  year  ago,  and  far  more 
seriousness  and  willingness  to  read  God's  Word  and 
hear  it  explained;  far  more  interest  in  things  that 
pertain  to  the  soul,  about  that  world  where  peace 
reigns  eternal,  and  the  horrid  sound  of  war  is  never 
heard." 

This  moral  and  spiritual  condition  of  the  army  was 
taken  notice  of  at  the  time,  and  was  a  cause  of  much 
satisfaction  and  confidence  among  our  people.  In 
his  Convention  Address  of  1861  Bishop  Meade  thus 
alludes  to  the  subject:  "Let  me  in  conclusion  commend 
to  [your]  special  prayers  all  those  who  have  devoted 
themselves  to  the  defence  of  our  State.  From  personal 
knowledge  of  many  of  them,  and  from  the  information 
of  others,  there  is  already,  I  believe,  a  large  portion  of 
religious  principle  and  genuine  piety  to  be  found  among 
them.  I  rejoice  to  learn  that  in  many  companies  not 
only  are  the  services  of  Chaplains  and  other  Minis- 
ters earnestly  sought  for  and  after,  but  social  prayer- 
meetings  held  among  themselves.     Our  own  Church 


74  THECHURCH 

has  a  very  large  proportion  of  communicants  among 
the  soldiers." 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Randolph  H.  McKim,  President  of 
the  House  of  Deputies  in  the  General  Convention, 
writes:  "I  was  a  private  soldier  the  first  year  of  the 
war,  and  used  to  conduct  prayer-meetings  among  my 
comrades;  had  a  tent  devoted  to  this  purpose.  As  a 
staff-officer  I  used  to  hold  services,  did  so  on  the  field 
of  battle  at  Gettysburg.  I  always  found  the  men 
receptive.  Their  moral  standard  and  tone  was  high, 
and  they  had  the  greatest  respect  for  religion.  I  served 
as  Chaplain  of  the  2nd  Virginia  Cavalry  for  eight 
months  at  the  close  of  the  war.  I  had  services  twice 
a  day  generally,  every  day  in  all  hard  campaigning, 
and  often  on  the  battlefield.  There  were  many  com- 
municants. They  rallied  round  me,  and  there  was 
much  religious  interest." 

These  are  four  witnesses;  they  might  be  increased 
to  hundreds.  But  is  anything  more  needed  to  show 
the  high  level  of  moral  and  religious  character  in  the 
men  who  made  up  the  Confederate  armies? 

That  this  moral  and  religious  improvement  was  steady 
and  continuous  is  evidenced  in  many  ways  by  con- 
temporaneous testimony.  The  Church  Intelligencer^ 
of  January  8,  1864,  has  a  careful  and  judicious  editorial 
article  upon  the  condition  of  religion  in  the  army,  in 
connection  with  the  reports  of  revival  services,  so 
common  during  that  winter.  The  editor  is  careful  to 
point  out  the  limitations  and  qualifications  which  must 
be  observed  in  forming  a  judgment  upon  the  solid 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        75 

results  of  such  movements.  He  admits  having  but 
Httle  sympathy  with  the  revival  system,  and  is  most 
cautious  in  calculating  its  permanent  fruits.  But  he  is 
very  clear  in  his  testimony  as  to  the  real  power  of  the 
religious  spirit  in  the  army:  "Among  the  best  news 
that  comes  to  us  in  these  troublous  times  is  that  of  the 
growing  attention  to  Christian  life  and  duly  in  our 
army.  .  .  .  From  all  quarters  this  intelligence  has 
for  months  past  been  coming  up  to  us.  ...  A  vast 
improvement  has  undoubtedly  taken  place  since  the 
commencement  of  the  war  —  indeed,  w^ithin  the  last 
few  months."  ^lany  reports  of  our  Clergy  of  this 
same  period  might  be  quoted  to  similar  purpose.  An 
editorial  note  in  the  same  paper,  April  1,  18G4,  says 
that  one  of  our  Bishops  in  the  South w^est  report?,  that 
during  the  preceding  year  he  had  confirmed  more  men 
than  w^omen;  and  he  explains  this  by  the  strong  relig- 
ious feeling  developed  among  the  soldiers:  "so  many 
in  the  army,  especially  the  officers,  w^ere  coming  for- 
ward manfully  to  assume  their  baptismal  promises." 
Even  more  remarkable  was  the  religious  character 
of  the  professional  soldiers  who  were  their  leaders. 
Most  of  the  Confederate  generals  of  the  first  distinc- 
tion had  been  bred  to  arms,  and  had  been  soldiers,  and 
soldiers  only,  from  boyhood.  And  in  many  cases  they 
were  as  eminent  for  religious  character  as  for  military 
achievements.  Lee,  Jackson,  and  Stuart  are  most 
prominent  examples  in  the  public  eye,  but  they  had 
many  like-minded  comrades.  The  publication  in  1904 
of  the  familiar  letters   of   General  Lee  was   a  reve- 


76  THECHURCH 

lation  even  to  those  most  familiar  with  him  in  his 
pubHc  character.  Seldom  has  there  lived  a  man  who 
amid  the  trials  and  vicissitudes  of  fortune,  in  victory 
and  in  defeat,  in  poverty  and  in  wealth,  has  exhibited 
such  simple,  unconscious  gentleness,  goodness,  purity, 
humility,  unruffled  sweetness,  and  serenity  of  mind 
and  of  spirit,  as  we  find  in  the  great  Confederate  com- 
mander. No  harsh  word  was  ever  heard  from  his  lips, 
no  feeling  of  bitterness  ever  invaded  his  breast.  His 
daily  devotions  remembered  before  God  both  friend 
and  foe,i  and  his  great  heart  took  up  as  its  own  the 
burden  of  all  faults  and  failures  of  others,  while  it 
generously  assigned  to  them  the  praises  due  to  his  own 
great  deeds.  The  Church  in  the  Confederate  States 
has  given  to  the  world  the  most  perfect  character, 
exhibited  by  any  great  historical  figure  of  modern 
times,  in  Robert  Edward  Lee.  And  in  their  lesser 
measure  many  of  his  soldiers,  officers  and  men,  followed 
after  his  noble  example  of  Christian  faith  and  conduct. 
Numberless  instances  and  references  might  be  given 
to  illustrate  the  general  prevalence  of  religious  feehng 
and  principle,  as  exhibited  in  the  daily  habits  of  officers 
and  men.    In  Dr.  Packard's  *'  Recollections  of  a  Long 

^  This  fact,  commonly  reported  and  believed  in  the  South,  that 
General  Lee  was  accustomed  to  remember  in  his  private  prayers  the 
soldiers  of  the  armies  opposed  to  him,  along  with  his  own  devoted 
followers,  led  to  the  introduction  of  a  like  petition  into  the  prayers 
licensed  for  use  in  the  Diocese  of  North  Carolina  during  the  Spanish- 
American  War  of  1898,  and  in  turn  caused  these  prayers  to  be  copied 
and  used  in  other  and  distant  Dioceses: 

"(So  shines  a  good  deed  in  a  naughty  world.'* 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        77 

Life"  we  read:  "I  went  to  the  camp  at  Manassas  to 
see  my  son  Joseph.^  I  slept  one  night  in  my  son's 
tent  on  the  soft  side  of  a  board.  It  was  the  custom  of 
this  company  to  have  prayers  at  the  dawn  of  day,  and 
next  morning  I  was  asked  to  officiate,  and  made  a 
prayer.  It  was  too  early  to  see  to  read.  The  scene 
was  a  thrilling  one.  It  was  a  remarkable  company, 
composed  largely  of  college  and  theological  students.'* 
At  the  bottom  of  the  same  page:  "I  saw  him"  [Gen- 
eral Pendleton]  '*once  again,  when  I  went  to  his  head- 
quarters at  sunrise  the  next  morning  to  get  a  furlough 
for  my  son,  who  was  sick.  lie  was  standing  by  a  fire 
out  of  doors  reading  his  Bible."  And  a  few  lines 
further  on:  "My  son  remembers  that  Jackson  came 
round  early  one  morning,  and  looking  in  the  tent 
gave  him  a  tract."  General  Lee  gave  as  many  Prayer 
Books  as  he  could  get  to  his  soldier  friends."  The 
Rev.  J.  Wm.  Jones,  in  his  book  "  Christ  in  the  Camp," 
mentions  that  a  bookseller  in  Richmond,  when  Gen- 
eral Lee  was  buying  Prayer  Books  in  his  store,  offered 
him  a  dozen  copies  for  the  old  one  which  he  had  carried 
for  many  years  in  his  pocket.  General  Lee  gladly 
made  the  exchange,  saying  that  he  would  give  the 
additional  books  to  his  soldiers. 

In  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  the  State  of  the 
Church,  in  the  Diocesan  Convention  of  Virginia  in 
1863,  we  are  told  that,  "The  army  is  like  a  field  white 
for  the  harvest.    From  the  Commanding  General  down 

*  Mr.  Joseph  Packard,  since  one  of  the  most  eminent  members 
of  the  General  Convention. 


78  THECHURCH 

to  the  unknown  private,  there  is  extended  a  hearty 
welcome  to  the  message  of  the  gospel,  and  to  him  who 
brings  it.  The  influence  of  our  own  Church,  though 
silent  and  unostentatious,  is  unmistakable."  In  his 
Address  to  the  same  Convention,  Bishop  Johns  says: 
"A  youthful  chaplain,  who  with  a  few  others  formed 
a  committee  to  confer  with  the  lamented  Jackson  on 
the  subject  of  ministerial  supply  for  the  soldiers,  found 
him  with  his  staff  engaged  in  a  prayer-meeting.  When 
its  solemn  exercises  were  concluded,  he  asked  the  young 
chaplain  to  say  to  me  that  there  were  forty  vacant 
chaplaincies  in  the  Army  of  the  Rappahannock,  and  to 
beg  me  to  send  some  of  our  clergy  to  visit  the  camp 
and  render  those  ministerial  services  which  were 
greatly  needed  a.nd  earnestly  desired.  .  .  .  Within 
the  last  week  I  was  unexpectedly  privileged  with  a 
brief  interview  with  his  surviving  friend  and  brother 
in  arms,  the  Commander-in-Chief.  .  .  .  From  his  lips 
I  received  an  appeal  in  perfect  consonance  with  the 
last  message  of  his  lamented  colleague  —  an  earnest 
request  for  special  ministerial  services  for  the  army, 
accompanied  by  the  statement  that  their  condition  is 
most  favorable  for  religious  improvement."  In  re- 
sponse to  this  appeal  the  Convention  passed  unani- 
mously a  resolution,  requesting  the  Bishop  to  call  upon 
those  clergymen  who  were  without  parishes  for  this 
service,  but  also  pledging  the  whole  body  of  the  clergy 
to  answer  his  call. 

It  is  unfortunate  that  so  little  should  have  been 
done  to  preserve  a  record  of  the  work  of  our  chaplains 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        79 

in  the  Confederate  service.  The  only  book,  professing 
to  be  a  history  of  reHgion  in  the  Army  of  Northern 
Virginia,^  is  by  a  Baptist  minister,  whose  conception 
of  rehgious  experience  was  so  strictly  limited  to  that 
peculiar  phase  associated  with  the  ordinary  revival, 
that  he  seldom  notices  any  kind  of  Christian  work 
not  in  line  with  that  which  appealed  specially  to  him- 
self. It  is  noticeable  that,  even  in  his  book,  some  of 
the  most  beautiful  examples  of  Christian  faith  and 
heroism  are  young  Virginia  Churchmen,  and  he  does 
justice  to  the  Christian  character  of  all  such,  who 
come  under  his  notice.  There  seems  to  be  no  designed 
or  conscious  unfairness  in  his  treatment,  but  perhaps 
naturally  the  work  of  our  chaplains  did  not  specially 
appeal  to  him  or  attract  his  attention. 

The  Church  sent  many  of  her  best  and  ablest  Priests 
as  chaplains  to  the  army.  Four  who  became  Bishops 
after  the  War  were  commissioned  chaplains,  and  de- 
voted in  their  service,  Bishop  Quintard  of  Tennessee, 
Bishop  Watson  of  East  Carolina,  Bishop  Randolph  of 
Southern  Virginia,  and  Bishop  Gray  of  Southern 
Florida.  Bishop  Beckwith  of  Georgia,  though  not  a 
regular  chaplain,  did  volunteer  work  as  a  chaplain  in 
the  Army  of  Tennessee  during  the  summer  of  1864. 

As  in  so  many  other  things,  so  Virginia  stands  first 
in  the  number  of  chaplains,  sending  a  total  of  twenty- 
nine  during  the  War  from  her  one  hundred  and  fifteen 
clergymen.  North  Carolina  came  next,  with  fifteen 
chaplains  from  her  total  of  fifty-three  diocesan  clergy. 
^  "Christ  in  the  Camp,"  by  the  Rev.  J.  Wm.  Jones. 


80  THECHURCH 

Georgia  gave  six;  Mississippi,  five;  Tennessee,  three; 
Louisiana  and  Texas,  each  two;  and  South  Carohna, 
Florida,  and  Alabama,  one  each.  These  numbers  are 
the  result  of  my  best  efforts  to  ascertain  the  names  of 
our  regular  chaplains  in  the  army.  Many,  however, 
served  temporarily  and  irregularly,  and  doubtless 
some  in  State  organizations,  whose  names  do  not  appear. 
Several  from  South  Carolina  are  known  to  have  served 
in  this  way,  notably  the  Rev.  A.  Toomer  Porter  and 
the  Rev.  T.  S.  Arthur.  The  Rev.  Robert  W.  Barnwell, 
of  that  Diocese,  sacrificed  his  life  in  devoted  attention 
to  the  sick  and  wounded  soldiers  in  the  army  hospitals 
in  Virginia.  In  the  later  stages  of  the  War  several  of 
the  Dioceses,  notably  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  Geor- 
gia, and  Alabama,  took  measures  to  send  their  parochial 
clergy  for  stated  periods  to  the  army,  to  serve  as 
chaplains  in  turn,  under  the  systematic  direction  of 
the  Bishop.  The  diocesan  Journal  of  Alabama  con- 
tains some  interesting  reports  of  clergymen  thus 
employed.  The  Bishops  themselves,  as  opportunity 
offered,  were  not  slow  to  give  their  services;  especially 
is  this  true  of  the  Bishop  of  Georgia  and  the  Bishop 
of  Virginia.  Bishop  Lay  seemed  in  a  fair  way  to  become 
something  like  a  "Chaplain  General"  in  the  Army  of 
Tennessee.  Being  by  the  course  of  hostilities  pre- 
vented from  w^orking  in  Arkansas,  he  gave  much  of  his 
time  to  work  in  our  Western  Army,  and  naturally 
became  a  sort  of  head  and  leader  for  such  of  our  Church 
clergymen  as  were  serving,  either  regularly  or  tem- 
porarily, as  chaplains  in  that  army.   They  found  much 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        81 

comfort  and  help  in  so  able  and  sympathetic  a  coun- 
sellor; and  diocesan  Bishops,  sending  their  parochial 
clergy  for  terms  of  a  few  months,  were  glad  to  com- 
mend them  to  his  care,  and  to  require  them  to  report 
to  him  upon  their  army  service.  An  Augusta  paper 
of  that  period  gives  an  interesting  article  illustrating 
the  perils  and  the  rewards  of  that  arduous  work : 

"We  are  enabled  to  lay  before  our  readers  the  fol- 
lowing extracts  from  a  letter  of  Bishop  Lay  to  a  relative 
in  this  city,  not  designed  for  publication.  Bishop 
Lay  is  now  employed  in  missionary  labor  with  the 
army  in  Georgia  under  General  Hood: 

"  *  Yesterday  in  Strahl's  brigade  I  preached  and  con- 
firmed nine  persons.  Last  night  we  had  a  very  solemn 
service  in  General  Hood's  room,  some  forty  persons, 
chiefly  Generals  and  Staff  Officers,  being  present.  I 
confirmed  General  Hood  and  one  of  his  Aides,  Captain 
Gordon,  of  Savannah,  and  a  young  Lieutenant  from 
Arkansas.  The  service  was  animated,  the  praying 
devout.  Shells  exploded  near  by  all  the  time.  General 
Hood,  unable  to  kneel,  supported  himself  on  his  crutch 
and  staff,  and  with  bowed  head  received  the  benedic- 
tion. Next  Sunday  I  am  to  administer  the  Commun- 
ion at  headquarters.  To-night  ten  or  twelve  are  to  be 
confirmed  in  Clayton's  division.  The  enemy  are 
within  two  hundred  and  fifty  yards  of  our  line,  and  the 
firing  is  very  constant.  I  fear  it  will  be  hard  to  get 
the  men  together. 

'*  *  I  wish  you  could  have  been  present  last  night  to 
have  seen  that  company  down,  all  on  bended  knee. 
7 


82  THECHURCH 

The  reverence  was  so  marked  that  one  could  not  fail 
to  thank  God  that  He  had  put  such  a  spirit  into  the 
hearts  of  our  leaders.' 

"We  are  requested  to  add  that  Bishop  Lay  is 
admirably  supported  in  his  labors  by  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Quintard,  who  as  Chaplain  and  Surgeon  ministers  to 
the  body  and  mind,  and  than  whom  no  man  is  better 
known  in  the  army.  To  serve  it  he  has  given  his 
time,  and  sacrificed  nearly  the  whole  of  his  property. 

"Bishop  Lay  writes  of  him:  *I  am  told  that  he 
could  not  leave  the  army;  he  is  better  than  any  man 
in  it.  Everybody  knows  him,  and  comes  to  him  for 
counsel.  There  is  no  Chaplain  comparable  to  him  in 
point  of  usefulness,  and  he  cannot  possibly  be  spared. 

"  *It  is  proposed  to  establish  an  Ecclesiastical 
Headquarters  to  move  with  the  army,  to  have  stated 
services,  to  be  always  accessible,  to  supply  books  and 
tracts,  to  receive  the  Clergy  and  show  them  how  to  go 
to  work.  General  Johnston  earnestly  endorsed  this 
plan,  and  General  Hood  will  furnish  all  facilities  for 
carrying  it  out.'" 

The  Confederate  States  government  did  not  come 
up  to  the  measure  of  its  duty  to  its  army  chaplains. 
They  had  no  rank  assigned  to  them,  and  no  uniform 
prescribed,  and  were  practically  left  to  make  a  place 
for  themselves,  though  this  disadvantage  was  largely 
remedied  by  the  personal  respect  and  affection  felt 
for  them  by  both  officers  and  men.  Their  pay  was 
fifty  dollars  and  the  ration  of  a  private  soldier.  This 
was  especially  hard  on  the  Virginia  and  North  Caro- 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        83 

lina  chiiphiins,  for  before  being  mustered  into  the 
Confederate  service  they  had,  in  the  miUtary  organiza- 
tion of  their  States,  enjoyed  the  rank  of  major,  and 
their  pay  was  one  hundred  and  fifty  dollars.  Towards 
the  end  of  the  War,  some  time  in  18G4,  their  pay  was 
by  an  act  of  the  Confederate  Congress  raised  to  eighty 
dollars  in  the  depreciated  and  depreciating  currency  of 
the  time,  and  they  were  allowed  forage  for  a  horse,  in 
case  they  were  so  fortunate  as  to  have  one.  They  were 
also  allowed  a  small  amount  of  stationery.  It  was  al- 
leged in  the  newspapers  at  the  time,  that  the  smallness 
of  the  pay,  at  first  allowed  by  the  Confederate  govern- 
ment, had  been  due  to  a  Member  of  Congress,  who 
argued  that,  as  the  chaplain  had  no  duty  but  to  preach 
on  Sunday,  he  might  well  earn  his  living  by  working 
during  the  week,  acting  as  sutler  in  the  army,  and  the 
like.  This  worthy  legislator  belonged  to  a  religious 
sect  which  does  not  require  pastoral  services  of  its 
ministers,  but  confines  their  function  to  the  one  duty 
of  preaching.  This  meanness  in  the  government 
caused  much  distress  to  those  faithful  chaplains  who 
had  no  private  fortune;  and  some  of  the  best  of  them 
were  thus  forced  to  return  to  parochial  work,  as  their 
only  means  of  obtaining  a  bare  subsistence.  But  the 
poorly  paid  chaplain,  marching  on  foot  w^th  the  men, 
is  not  the  least  heroic  figure  of  that  heroic  time. 

Perhaps  Bishop  Quintard  was  the  most  effective  of 
all  our  chaplains,  and  he  is  the  only  one  who  has  left 
any  adequate  record  of  his  work.     His  brief  biography, 


84  THECHURCH 

published  in  1905  by  the  Rev.  Arthur  Howard  Noll, 
is  in  effect  largely  the  personal  narrative  of  his  experi- 
ence as  chaplain,  and  it  is  well  worth  reading.  Bishop 
Quintard  was  a  remarkable  man  in  many  ways,  and 
perhaps  his  many  striking  and  attractive  qualities 
were  most  fully  and  admirably  displayed  in  his  work 
in  the  army.  He  seemed  to  be  everywhere,  to  see 
everything,  and  to  know  everybody.  Quick  in  move- 
ment, in  apprehension,  in  sympathy;  affectionate, 
generous;  a  skilled  physician  and  surgeon,  as  well  as  a 
devout  and  ardent  Christian  Priest,  he  made  for  him- 
self a  place  in  the  hearts  and  minds  of  the  soldiers  of 
the  Army  of  Tennessee,  and  by  a  natural,  and  all  but 
necessary,  transition  became  their  Bishop  when  he 
could  no  longer  be  their  chaplain.  His  personal 
narrative  is  of  fascinating  interest.  WTiether  admin- 
istering the  Holy  Communion  to  the  officers  and  men 
of  the  Merrimac,  before  their  famous  fight  in  Hamp- 
ton Roads;  or  working  fourteen  hours  as  surgeon, 
without  cessation,  after  a  bloody  battle,  amputating 
limbs,  dressing  wounds,  tearing  his  very  shirt  into 
strips  to  use  as  bandages,  and  then  leaning  against  the 
rail -fence  and  weeping  like  a  child  from  sheer  nervous 
exhaustion;  or  demanding  an  interview  vAih.  the  severe 
and  sarcastic  General  Bragg  upon  "a  matter  of  life 
and  death,''  that  he  might  speak  to  him  of  his  duty  to 
confess  Christ,  and  bringing  tears  into  those  hard  eyes, 
as  the  general  in  command  of  the  army  surrenders 
to  the  soldier  of  the  Cross ;  —  he  is  always  the  same 
vital,  generous,  brave,  and  loving  soul,  giving  freely 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        85 

all  lie  has  to  give,  and  getting  everything  whieh  any 
one  else  has  to  give.  He  mentions  baptizing  six 
generals,  and  presenting  a  number  for  Confirmation; 
among  the  latter  Generals  Bragg,  Hood,  Hardee,  and 
two  unnamed,  one  of  whom,  I  cannot  help  thinking, 
must  have  been  General  Joseph  E.  Johnston,  who  is 
mentioned  as  having  been  baptized  a  few  days  before 
by  Bishop  Polk. 

One  of  the  noblest  men  who  served  in  the  Confed- 
erate Ai'my  was  the  late  Bishop  Watson,  of  East  Caro- 
lina. Though  a  native  of  Brooklyn,  New  York,  he  had 
lived  in  the  South  since  his  early  manhood,  and  had 
been  ordained  Priest  by  Bishop  Ives  in  1845.  He  was 
one  of  the  first  of  his  Diocese  to  offer  himself  for  service 
in  the  army,  resigning  one  of  the  largest  parishes  in 
the .  Diocese  to  become  chaplain  of  the  2d  North 
CaroHna  Infantry  Regiment  in  the  summer  of  1861. 
Frail  in  body,  he  was  indomitable  of  soul,  and  during 
the  fiercest  battle  he  was  more  apt  to  be  found  among 
the  wounded  and  dying  between  the  hostile  lines  than 
in  any  safer  place.  "Mr.  Watson,  go  to  the  rear  with 
the  wounded,  Sir!"  commanded  his  colonel,  as  the 
chaplain  pressed  forward  beyond  the  line  towards 
the  wounded  men  lying  in  front.  "I  think  I  know  my 
duty,  Sir,"  replied  the  chaplain  without  pausing; 
and  there  was  that  in  his  eye  which  would  not  be 
turned  back.  I  had  this  incident  from  the  lips  of  the 
colonel  1  who  was  thus  disobeyed.  At  the  battle  of 
Williamsburg,  one  of  the  first  in  which  his  regiment 
^  Colonel  William  L.  DeRosset. 


86  THECHURCH 

was  engaged,  when  many  dead  and  wounded  had 
been  left  between  the  hnes,  and  shot  and  shell  still 
played  across  the  bloody  field,  General  Magruder 
asked:  "Who  is  that  little  man  there  in  front  among 
the  wounded?"  "The  Rev.  Mr.  Watson,  chaplain 
of  the  2d  North  Carolina,"  was  the  reply.  "Then 
tell  him  to  come  and  take  command  of  the  troops," 
exclaimed  Magruder,  "for  he  is  a  braver  man  than 
I  am."i 

The  Rev.  Alfred  M.  Randolph,  since  Bishop  of 
Southern  Virginia,  was  driven  out  of  his  house,  with 
his  wife  and  their  infant  a  day  old,  by  the  bombardment 
of  Fredericksburg;  and  being  thus  without  a  parish 
became  a  chaplain  in  the  army,  displaying  the  most 
devoted,  single-minded  courage  and  zeal  on  the  battle- 
field among  the  wounded,  under  the  fire  of  the  enemy, 
and  in  the  sorer  trials  of  ministering  in  the  crowded 
field  and  post  hospitals.  The  Rev.  William  Meredith, 
of  Virginia,  was  among  the  most  faithful  chaplains, 
only  it  was  said  that  he  always  forgot  he  was  a  chaplain 
during  the  battle,  and  took  his  place  in  the  fighting 
line  until  the  battle  was  over,  when  he  would  resume 
his  ministrations  to  the  wounded  and  dying.  The 
Rev.  Edward  T.  Perkins,  after  the  W^ar  a  very  dis- 
tinguished clergyman  of  Kentucky,  and  for  many  years 
Deputy  from  that  Diocese  to  the  General  Convention, 
was  a  chaplain  loved  and  honored  throughout  the 
Army  of  Northern  Virginia.     During  the  last  days  of 

^  I  had  understood  that  this  happened  at  Malvern  Hill,  but 
Bishop  Strange  tells  me  it  was  at  Williamsburg. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        87 

its  glorious  history,  during  the  investment  of  Peters- 
burg, he  would  crawl  during  the  night  from  picket-post 
to  picket-post,  to  pray  with  the  men  on  this  arduous 
duty,  and  to  help  them  by  words  of  sympathy  and 
cheer. 

The  Rev.  George  Patterson,  chaplain  of  the  3d 
North  Carolina  Infantry,  was  one  of  the  most  faithful 
and  beloved  of  all  our  clergy  in  the  army,  and  a  man  of 
striking,  not  to  say  eccentric,  personality.  He  acted 
out  his  strong  feelings  and  convictions  with  a  perfect 
frankness  and  simplicity,  which  sometimes  produced 
surprising  situations;  but  his  absolute  sincerity  and 
the  goodness  of  his  honest  heart  carried  him  to  the 
hearts  of  the  soldiers.  He  read  the  Burial  Service  over 
Colonel  H.  Allen  Brown,  of  the  First  North  Carolina 
Regiment,  on  the  bloody  field  of  Spottsylvania,  when 
he  thought  him  in  articulo  mortis,  as  the  exigencies  of 
the  situation  would  not  allow  of  his  remaining  with  the 
dying  man,  to  whom  he  felt  that  he  ought  to  give 
the  last  rites  of  the  Church  which  he  loved.  One 
account  has  it  that  the  colonel,  consenting  to  the 
service,  made  the  proper  responses  to  the  chaplain's 
prayers.  They  were  both  most  deadly  in  earnest,  and 
it  is  hard  to  imagine  a  nobler  example  of  Christian 
faith  and  devotion  —  the  heroic  soldier  stricken  with 
the  hand  of  death,  as  he  believes,  and  his  friend  and 
pastor,  unable  to  remain  that  he  may  close  his  eyes, 
yet  saying  over  the  dying  man  the  solemn  Office  of  the 
Dead,  to  which  his  failing  voice  cries  "Amen"!  In 
fact.  Colonel  Brown  survived  and  is  living  today  in 


88  THECHURCH 

Columbia,  Tennessee;  and  his  faithful  and  godly 
life  has  well  illustrated  that  strange  experience  of 
trial  and  Christian  fortitude. 

This  same  *' Father  Patterson"  was  a  rigid  Church- 
man and  disciplinarian.  Being  in  winter  quarters,  a 
distinguished  Presbyterian  divine,  attached  to  General 
Jackson's  staff,  thought  to  Episcopate  mildly,  by 
making  appointments  to  visit  the  several  regiments,  to 
preach  to  the  soldiers,  and  to  confer  with  the  chaplains 
upon  their  spiritual  interests.  In  the  course  of  this 
visitation  he  sent  due  notice  to  Mr.  Patterson  of 
a  visit  to  his  regiment.  Upon  the  appointed  day 
the  visiting  divine  arrived,  but  found  no  preparations 
made  for  preaching.  Enquiring  for  the  chaplain,  Mr. 
Patterson  appeared  and  informed  him  that,  as  he  was 
not  aware  that  he  had  any  authority  to  preach  in  that 
regiment,  he  had  not  regarded  his  notice,  and  did  not 
propose  to  let  him  preach.  The  visitor  retired  dis- 
comfited, and  made  complaint  to  General  Jackson. 
Riding  through  the  camp  a  few  days  after  this.  General 
Jackson  saw  Mr.  Patterson  standing  in  the  door  of 
his  tent.  Drawing  rein  before  the  tent  he  asked  if  he 
were  not  speaking  to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Patterson,  chaplain 
of  the  3d  North  Carolina  Regiment.  Mr.  Patterson 
saluted  his   General,  and  replied  in   the   affirmative. 

*'The  Rev.  Dr.  tells  me,"  said  Jackson,  *'that 

you  refused  to  let  him  preach  to  your  men."  *'I  did," 
replied  the  chaplain.  "Why  did  you  object  to  his 
preaching?"  inquired  the  General.  "He  could  have 
done  them  no  harm;    and  he  might  have  done  them 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        89 

some  good."  Mr.  Patterson  looked  fixedly  at  Jackson 
for  a  moment,  with  a  singularly  penetrating  gaze  very 
characteristic  of  him,  and  then  asked  in  his  quick, 
earnest  manner:  "General  Jackson,  do  you  want 
any  one  to  help  you  to  command  this  army  corps.^" 
"No,  Sir,"  replied  Jackson  very  emphatically,  "I  do 
not."  "Well,"  said  Mr.  Patterson,  "and  I  don't 
w^ant  anybody  to  help  me  to  be  chaplain  of  this  regi- 
ment." General  Jackson  in  turn  gazed  at  the  chap- 
lain for  a  moment,  with  perhaps  a  suspicion  of  humor 
in  his  gray  eye:  "Good-morning,  Mr.  Patterson,"  he 
said,  and  rode  on.  The  story  is  characteristic  of  both 
men.  I  had  it  from  a  prominent  lawyer  of  North 
Carolina,  who  was  a  soldier  in  Mr.  Patterson's  regiment. 

At  a  famous  review  of  the  Army  of  Northern  Virginia, 
in  June,  1863,  just  prior  to  General  Lee's  advance  into 
Pennsylvania,  Mr.  Patterson  marched  in  his  place 
with  his  regiment,  in  surplice  and  stole,  and  w4th  his 
Prayer  Book  in  hand.  "When  the  regiment  passed 
General  Lee,  he  acknowledged  its  salute  in  a  very 
marked  manner,  bowing  to  his  saddlebow  with  bared 
head.  W^hen  asked  why  he  did  so,  he  replied:  'I 
salute  the  Church  of  the  living  God.'"  ^ 

The  faithful  chaplains,  who  so  fearlessly  exposed 
themselves  in  ministering  to  the  bodily  and  spiritual 
necessities  of  the  wounded  and  dying  upon  the  battle- 
field, did  not  always  escape  injury,  though  it  is  to  be 
presumed  that  they  were  never  purposely  molested. 

^  I  give  this  incident  on  the  authority  and  in  the  written  words 
of  the  late  Major  Graham  Daves. 


90  THECHURCH 

Bishop  Green  in  his  Convention  Address  of  1862,  after 

speaking  of  the  death  of  Bishop  Meade,  thus  refers  to 

that  of  one  of  his  clergy,  the  Rev.  M.  Leander  Weller: 

"Far  different  were  the  dying  circumstances  of  our 

young  soldier-brother  Weller.     His  spirit  went  up  on 

high  from  the  midst  of  the  battleiSeld,  but  he  was  not 

unprepared  for  that  rude  and  sudden  call.     He  had 

gone  into  the  ranks,  and  patiently  borne  the  toils  and 

privations  of  the  common  soldier,  for  the  purpose  of 

getting  nearer  to  the  hearts  of  his  comrades  in  arms. 

After   distinguishing   himself  for   uncommon  bravery 

and  the  faithful  performance  of  all  his  duties,  he  was 

appointed  chaplain  of  his  Regiment,  with  the  prospect 

of  much  usefulness  before  him.     But  the  measure  of 

his  days  was  near  its  end.     On  the  memorable  field  of 

Shiloh  he  fell  in  the  thickest  of  the  fight.     Thus  passed 

from  amongst  us  a  man  in  whom  were  blended  the 

simplicity  of  the  child,  the  purity  and  gentleness  of  a 

w^oman,  the  dauntless  courage  of  the  soldier,  and  the 

unaffected  piety  of  the  Christian." 

In    The   Church  Intelligencer  of  June   13,   1862,  is 

this  following  item  of  news:    "The  Rev.  L.  H.  Jones, 

of  San  Antonio,  Texas,  we  learn,  fell  sorely  wounded 

at  the  battle  of  Glorietta,  while  bending  with  a  white 

flag  in  his  hand,  over  the  body  of  a  dying  soldier,  to 

whom  he  was  ministering  the  comforts  of  religion."  ^ 

^  This  brave  chaplain  did  not  die  of  the  wound  thus  received, 
though  none  the  less  he  sacrificed  his  life  in  the  service.  Bishop 
Gregg  says  of  him:  "The  Rev.  L.  H.  Jones,  Chaplain  of  Reily's 
Regiment,  died  October  last  [1863].  He  was  assiduous  in  the  dis- 
charge of  every  duty,  ministering  to  all  alike,  even  where  danger 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        91 

A  very  important  part  of  Church  work  for  the  soldiers 
was  in  supplying  them  with  religious  reading  and, 
indeed,  with  proper  reading  of  any  character.  To  meet 
this  necessity  all  the  different  religious  bodies  made 
noble  exertions.  In  our  own  communion  the  leader 
in  this  enterprise  seems  to  have  been  the  Virginia 
Diocesan  Missionary  Society.  They  are  said  to  have 
printed  and  distributed  many  thousands  of  pages  of 
tracts.  Their  "Soldier's  and  Sailor's  Prayer  Book" 
will  be  mentioned  later. 

In  South  Carolina  a  society  called  the  "Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  Female  Bible,  Prayer  Book,  and 
Tract  Society"  had  been  in  operation  for  many  years. 
This  became  a  useful  agency  in  circulating  Bibles, 
Prayer  Books,  and  tracts  among  the  soldiers.  Most 
of  their  work  was  necessarily  devoted  to  supplying 
the  camps  and  hospitals  near  Charleston,  where  many 
thousands  of  soldiers  were  collected;  but  we  have 
evidence  that  they  sent  their  benefactions  both  to 
Virginia  and  to  the  Army  of  Tennessee.  They  im- 
ported tracts  from  England,  the  old  familiar  works  of 
Hannah  More  and  Leigh  Richmond;  they  published 
many  themselves  suitable  for  the  soldiers:  "Prayer," 
"Faithfulness,"  "Christian  Soldier,"  "Watching  and 
Sleeping  Christianity,"  "The  Narrow  Way,"  "Sunday 
Morning  Dream,"  "Roll  Call,"  "A  few  Words  to  the 
Soldiers   of   the   Confederate   States,"   "Prayers   and 

threatened  most,  winning  the  universal  confidence  and  affection  of 
the  command.  After  a  long  course  of  hardship  and  exposure  he 
died,  where  he  would  have  wished  to  die,  at  the  post  of  duty." 


92  THECHURCH 

other  Devotions  for  the  Use  of  the  Soldiers,"  etc. 
Bibles,  Prayer  Books,  and  thousands  of  these  and  other 
tracts,  were  distributed  in  camp  and  fort  and  hospital. 
Public  calamities  and  private  suffering  put  an  end  to 
the  operations  of  this  Society  before  the  end  of  the 
War,  but  not  before  it  had  done  immense  service. 

Bishop  Quintard  gives  a  pathetic  incident,  connected 
apparently  with  the  work  of  this  Society,  whose  agent 
was  Mr.  J.  K.  Sass,  of  Charleston,  one  of  the  most 
prominent  laymen  of  South  Carolina,  and  the  Treas- 
urer, as  has  been  said,  for  Domestic  Missions  in  the 
Confederate  States,  and  also  Treasurer  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council.  Bishop  Quintard  states  that  in  1864 
he  prepared  two  small  books  for  the  use  of  the  soldiers, 
one  as  a  sort  of  substitute  for  the  Prayer  Book  for 
private  use,  the  other  called  *'Balm  for  the  Weary  and 
Wounded."  He  says:  "It  was  through  the  great 
kindness  and  generosity  of  Mr.  Jacob  K.  Sass,  the 
Treasurer  of  the  General  Council  of  the  Church  in 
the  Confederate  States,  that  I  was  enabled  to  publish 
these  two  little  volumes.  The  first  four  copies  of  the 
latter  booklet  that  came  from  the  press  were  forwarded 
to  General  Polk,  and  he  wrote  upon  three  of  them  the 
names  of  General  J.  E.  Johnston,  Lieutenant-General 
Hardee,  and  Lieutenant-General  Hood,  respectively, 
and  *With  the  compliments  of  Lieutenant-General 
Leonidas  Polk,  June  12,  1864.'  They  were  taken 
from  the  breast-pocket  of  his  coat,  stained  with  his 
blood,  after  his  death,  and  forwarded  to  the  officers 
for  whom  he  had  intended  them." 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        93 

Early  in  the  year  18G4  there  was  formed  in  Charlotte, 
N.C.,  "The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  Publishing 
Association'*  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  religious 
literature  for  circulation  in  the  army.  So  far  as  can 
now  be  ascertained  this  Association  consisted  of  one 
godly  and  generous  layman,  John  Wilkes,  of  St.  Peter's 
Church,  Charlotte,  and  his  rector,  the  Rev.  George 
M.  Everhart.  Mr.  Wilkes  was  treasurer  and  Mr. 
Everhart  "Book  and  Tract  Editor."  No.  1  of  its 
series  of  tracts,  and  much  the  longest  of  them,  was 
Bishop  Lay's  "Letters  to  a  Man  Bewildered  among 
many  Counsellors."  Next  came  a  sermon  by  Bishop 
Wilmer,  "Future  Good."  A  bundle  of  the  briefer 
ones,  on  dirty-brown  Confederate  paper,  shows  the 
following  titles,  as  specimens,  "Fragments  for  the 
Sick,"  "The  Repentance  of  Judas,"  "The  Doubting 
Christian  Encouraged,"  "There's  a  Good  Time  Com- 
ing," "Prayers  for  the  Sick  and  Wounded,"  two  "On 
Confirmation,"  "Profane  Swearing,"  "Repentance  of 
David,"  by  Dr.  Pusey,  "The  Day  of  Adversity." 
Later  we  find  Bishop  Quintard's  notable  little  army 
tracts:  "Balm  for  the  Weary  and  Wounded,"  and 
"Nellie  Peters'  Pocket  Handkerchief."  There  were 
later  added  "The  Church  Catechism  Simplified,"  a 
"Catechism  for  very  Young  Children  and  Servants," 
and  "Tracts  for  Children."  This  Association  seems 
to  have  done  the  most  extensive  work  of  its  kind  which 
was  done  by  the  Church  in  the  South.  Their  orders 
came  from  all  the  States  of  the  South,  from  Virginia  to 
Mississippi.     In  one  issue  of   The  Church  Intelligencer 


94  THECHURCH 

they  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  over  ten  thousand 
dollars,  contributed  from  different  Dioceses,  parishes, 
and  individuals,  for  the  distribution  of  tracts  in  the 
army  and  the  hospitals.  This  was  in  Confederate 
money,  and  it  was  probably  the  total  amount  of  all 
receipts  up  to  that  date,  but  even  so  it  indicates  a 
very  considerable  amount  of  work.  In  Bishop  Wil- 
mer's  Address  to  his  Convention  of  1864,  speaking  of 
the  difficulty  of  procuring  religious  books  for  the  army, 
he  says  that  he  has  made  arrangements  with  The 
Church  Intelligencer,  published  in  Charlotte,  for  a 
regular  supply  of  tracts;  and  after  communications 
became  so  interrupted  that  they  could  not  be  delivered 
in  Alabama,  he  directed  them  to  be  sent  to  Bishop  Lay 
in  North  Carolina  for  use  among  the  soldiers.  Thus  as 
the  War  went  on,  the  Church  through  her  faithful 
clergy  and  laity  endeavored  to  meet  its  varied  demands; 
and  especially  the  heart  of  the  people  w^ent  out  to  the 
brave  soldiers,  and  all  their  slender  resources  were 
taxed  to  the  uttermost  to  meet  the  spiritual  needs  of 
the  army. 

In  this  connection  it  is  proper  to  mention  The  Church 
Intelligencer,  published  in  Raleigh  from  March,  1860, 
until  April  1, 1864,  when  under  the  increasing  difficulties 
of  the  times  it  suspended  publication.  In  September 
of  the  same  year  it  was  revived  in  Charlotte,  and 
continued  to  be  issued  regularly  until  March,  1867. 
It  is  a  most  valuable  repository  of  the  history  of  the 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States,  and  may  be  said  to 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES        95 

have  been  in  effect  the  official  organ  of  that  Church. 
It  took  its  origin,  in  the  first  instance,  as  we  learn  from 
the  letter  of  a  most  intelligent  correspondent  ^  in  its 
first  number,  at  a  conference  in  Richmond,  during 
the  General  Convention  of  1859,  of  the  Southern 
Bishops  associated  together  in  the  establishment  of 
the  University  of  the  South.  It  seemed  to  them 
desirable  that  some  Church  paper  should  represent 
their  great  enterprise,  and  afford  them  a  ready  means 
of  bringing  their  purposes  and  their  work  before  the 
Churchmen  of  the  South.  They  therefore  conferred 
together  in  Richmond,  and  determined  to  establish 
such  a  paper.  Raleigh  was  agreed  upon  as  the  place 
of  publication,  and  two  North  Carolina  clergymen, 
the  Rev.  Thomas  S.  W.  Mott  and  the  Rev.  Harry  F. 
Green,  respectively  "Proprietor  and  Editor,"  under- 
took to  carry  on  the  work.  Mr,  Green  wrote  the 
opening  editorial,  but  died  two  wrecks  before  the 
appearance  of  the  first  number.  His  place  w^as  supplied 
by  the  Rev.  Frederick  Fitzgerald.  Mr.  Fitzgerald, 
after  something  more  than  a  year's  service,  retired  to 
become  a  chaplain  in  the  Confederate  Army,  and  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Mott  acted  as  editor  until  the  suspension  of 
the  paper  in  April,  1864.  It  w^as  the  recognized  official 
organ  of  the  Bishops  of  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina, 
Georgia,  Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana, 
Texas,  Arkansas,  and  Tennessee,  and  of  the  University 

^  I  think  I  am  not  mistaken  in  identifying  this  anonymous  cor- 
respondent with  the  Rev.  Dr.  Aldert  Smedes,  of  St.  Mary's  School, 
Raleigh. 


96  THECHURCH 

of  the  South.  Its  circulation  extended  over  all  the 
territory  reached  by  the  mail  service  of  the  Confederate 
States,  and  it  contains  such  a  collection  of  official 
reports  of  Bishops  and  Conventions,  news-letters  by 
correspondents,  communications  from  prominent  clergy- 
men and  laymen  upon  questions  of  general  and  local 
Church  interest,  as  can  be  found  nowhere  else.  Except 
the  Southern  Churchman,  published  in  Virginia  and 
circulating  chiefly  in  that  Diocese,  and  the  Southern 
Episcopalian^  published  irregularly  in  Charleston,  it 
was  our  only  Church  paper  in  the  South,  and  presents 
in  its  contents  a  wide  variety  of  interesting  informa- 
tion and  able  discussion.  As  its  means  of  gathering 
news  from  beyond  the  limits  of  the  South  became  more 
and  more  restricted,  by  the  increasing  strength  and 
efficiency  of  encompassing  hostile  armies  and  fleets, 
instead  of  narrowing  its  view  to  purely  local  interests, 
it  took  up  questions  of  history,  of  Church  polity,  and 
of  literature,  giving  original  articles  and  sometimes 
translations  of  ancient  authors.  A  very  scholarly 
series  upon  English  Religious  Poetry  included  long 
and  appreciative  articles  upon  Robert  Herrick,  Henry 
Vaughan,  Robert  Southwell,  and  others;  another 
series  treated  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  Clement  and 
Ignatius,  with  translations  from  some  of  their  Epistles; 
and  many  articles,  both  original  and  selected,  dealt 
with  subjects  less  strictly  ecclesiastical.  And  there 
is  no  lack  of  darker  pictures  of  the  bloodshed,  poverty, 
and  destruction  which  in  all  directions  drew  a  steadily 
contracting  line  of  horror  around  our  devoted  land. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES       97 

The  Church  of  the  Confederate  States  has  no  cause 
to  feel  ashamed  of  its  paper,  The  Church  Intelligencer. 
About  the  time  that  the  Rev.  Mr.  Mott  in  the 
spring  of  1864  had  to  discontinue  its  pubhcation,  "The 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  Publishing  Association  " 
began  its  work  in  Charlotte,  as  has  been  mentioned. 
Upon  the  urgent  solicitation  of  the  Bishop  of  North 
Carolina,  and  of  prominent  clergymen  and  laymen  of 
that  and  other  Dioceses,  this  Association  undertook  to 
revive  The  Church  Intelligencer y  and  September  14, 
1864,  the  first  member  of  the  new  series  appeared, 
with  the  Rev.  Professor  Fordyce  M.  Hubbard  and 
the  Rev.  George  M.  Everhart  as  editors,  and  the 
Association,  i.e.  John  Wilkes,  as  publisher.  Under 
this  new  management  the  paper,  though  smaller  in 
size,  maintained,  and  even  increased,  its  high  standard 
of  excellence.  Prof.  Hubbard  held  the  chair  of  Latin 
at  the  University  of  North  Carolina,  but  was  also  an 
accomplished  English  scholar;  and  this  little  sheet, 
upon  dingy  Confederate  paper,  in  point  of  literary 
excellence  compares  favorably  with  the  best  of  our 
Church  papers  of  today.  It  continued  for  two  years 
and  a  half,  under  the  new  management,  to  serve  a 
valuable  purpose  in  the  life  of  the  Church  in  the  South, 
its  last  issue  appearing  in  March,  1867,  seven  years 
almost  to  a  day  from  the  date  of  its  first  number. 
During  the  last  year  of  its  publication  the  editor  of  a 
leading  New  York  literary  journal,  in  estimating  the 
quality  of  the  religious  press  of  the  United  States  in 
point  of  intellectual  and  literary  ability,  assigned  to 
8 


98  THECHURCH 

The  Church  Intelligencer  a  place  in  the  first  rank  of 
the  religious  periodicals  of  the  country.^ 

The  General  Council  at  Augusta  had  appointed  a 
committee  to  report  to  its  next  meeting  such  changes 
in  the  Prayer  Book,  not  affecting  doctrine  or  discipline, 
as  might  seem  desirable,  and  authorized  in  the  mean- 
time to  publish  an  edition  of  the  Prayer  Book  for 
present  use.  They  were  also  authorized  to  print,  for 
special  use  in  the  army  and  navy,  a  compendium, 
for  public  worship,  of  certain  parts  of  the  Prayer  Book 
most  commonly  used.  The  only  action  of  this  com- 
mittee, so  far  as  is  now  known,  was  to  carry  out  the 
last  of  the  above  directions,  by  publishing  a  pamphlet 
of  forty-eight  pages,  printed  at  Atlanta  in  1863  by 
R.  J.  Maynard,  containing,  in  a  novel  but  very  conven- 
ient arrangement.  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  the  Lit- 
any, the  Ante-Communion,  certain  selected  '*  Prayers 
and  Thanksgivings,"  six  of  the  "Selections  of  Psalms," 
the  "Office  for  the  Burial  of  the  Dead,"  "Prayers 
to  be  used  at  Sea,"  and  a  small  number  of  the 
"Psalms  in  Metre"  and  Hymns  from  the  old  Prayer 
Book  collection.  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  were 
shortened  by  the  omission  of  alternative  forms,  as, 
one  of  the  forms  of  Absolution,  the  Nicene  Creed,  etc.; 
and  there  was  introduced  into  Morning  Prayer  the 

^I  was  at  the  time  a  student  in  Trinity  College,  Hartford,  and 
remember  distinctly  the  above  statement  being  made  to  me  by  Pro- 
fessor, now  Bishop,  Niles,  with  the  name  of  the  paper  and  its  editor, 
though  neither  he  nor  I  can  now  recall  them. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      99 

"Third  Selection  of  Psalms,"  and  into  Evening  Prayer 
the  "Sixth  Selection."  What  is  called  "the  Lesser 
Litany"  was  also  omitted.  Apparently  only  a  small 
edition  was  printed,  and  it  seems  to  have  been  little 
used  or  known. 

The  Missionary  Society  of  the  Diocese  of  Virginia 
put  out  a  similar  publication,  called  "The  Army  and 
Navy  Prayer  Book."  The  first  edition  was  of  10,000 
copies,  and  was  published  in  1862  or  1863,  Macfarlane 
&  Furgusson,  of  Richmond,  being  the  printers;  and 
is  spoken  of  by  Bishop  Johns  in  his  Convention  Address 
as,  "A  manual  of  public  services  and  private  devotions 
taken  from  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  with  a  selec- 
tion of  Psalms  and  Hymns  —  printed  for  the  special  use 
of  our  soldiers."  Within  a  year  or  so  after  this  edition 
had  appeared,  another,  of  25,000  copies,  was  printed 
for  the  Society  by  Charles  H.  Wynne,  of  Richmond. 
This  little  book,  bound  in  heavy  brown  paper  and  of 
a  size  to  be  carried  in  the  pocket,  contained  three  short 
services.  The  first  service  was  an  abbreviated  form 
of  Morning  (or  Evening)  Prayer,  with  seven  Psalms 
from  the  Psalter  appended;  the  second  was  the 
Litany,  with  brief  introductory  sentences  and  exhor- 
tation; the  third  was  made  up  mostly  of  extracts  from 
the  Ante-Communion  Office;  then  followed  sixteen 
"occasional  prayers,"  the  Office  of  Confirmation;  and 
last  a  small  selection  of  Metrical  Psalms  and  a  number 
of  Hymns,  mostly  taken  from  the  collection  at  that 
time  bound  up  with  the  Prayer  Book. 

Three  editions  of  the  "Confederate  Prayer  Book" 


100  THE    CHURCH 

are  known  to  have  been  printed  by  Eyre  &  Spottis- 
woode,  of  London,  in  1863,  upon  orders  from  the  South. 
They  are  quite  different  in  type,  size,  and  binding,  but 
were  evidently  put  out  about  the  same  time  and  under 
the  same  direction  or  supervision.  They  have  not 
the  formal  "Ratification  and  Adoption"  prescribed 
to  be  used  by  the  committee  authorized  by  the  Gen- 
eral Council  of  November,  1862,  to  publish  the  Prayer 
Book,  and  must  therefore  have  been  published  without 
the  sanction  of  that  committee,  and  as  a  matter  of 
private  enterprise  or  zeal.  They  have  all  the  same 
errors,  the  words  "United  States"  being  left  unchanged 
in  the  Prayers  to  be  used  at  Sea,  and  in  the  Promise  of 
Conformity  made  by  the  Bishop-Elect,  in  the  Office  for 
the  Consecration  of  a  Bishop.  The  Metrical  Psalms 
and  Hymns  appended  to  the  book  are  introduced  by 
the  same  joint-resolution  of  "the  General  Convention 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States  of  America." 

The  largest  and  the  smallest  in  size  of  these  editions, 
the  one  a  24mo,  long  f  rimer,  the  other  about  a  64mo, 
were  printed  for  a  Richmond  publisher,  and  have  on 
their  title-page:  "Richmond,  Virginia;  J.  W.  Ran- 
dolph"; but  upon  the  reverse  of  the  title-page  we 
read:  "London:  —  Printed  by  G.  E.  Eyre  and  W.  T. 
Spottiswoode."  The  only  copies  of  these  books,  which 
the  writer  has  been  able  to  see  or  to  hear  of,  have  been 
in  the  North,  or  have  been  brought  from  the  North. 
One  of  the  smallest  of  these  books  is  included  in  a 
Catalogue  of  Prayer  Books  exhibited  at  the  Boston 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   101 

Public  Library  in  1906,  and  there  is  appended  in  the 
catalogue  a  note  to  the  effect  that,  ''About  four 
hundred  copies  were  sent  out  in  the  Blockade  Runner 
Robert  E.  Lee,  and  captured  off  Wilmington,  N.  C, 
and  sold  at  prize  sale  in  Boston,  December  1863." 
The  only  copy  of  the  larger  book,  24mo,  long  primer, 
ever  seen  by  the  writer,  was  given  to  the  Rev.  McNeely 
DuBose,  of  Asheville,  by  a  lady,  who  wrote  upon  an 
inserted  fly-leaf:  "This  book  with  many  others,  was 
thrown  from  a  Blockade  runner,  while  being  pursued 
by  a  Federal  gunboat  during  the  war  of  1861-1865. 
It  was  given  me  by  an  oflScer  of  the  gunboat."  It  is 
not  an  unreasonable  conjecture  that  the  blockade 
runner  thus  pursued  was  the  same  Robert  E.  Lee 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  note,  and  that  part  of  the 
consignment  of  Prayer  Books  to  J.  W.  Randolph, 
Richmond,  were  lost,  and  the  rest  captured  and  sold 
at  prize  sale.  So  far  as  can  be  ascertained,  none  of 
them  came  into  use  in  the  South  during  the  War. 

The  third  of  these  Confederate  Prayer  Books, 
printed  at  the  same  time  by  the  same  firm,  having  only 
their  name  on  the  title-page,  and  showing  exactly  the 
same  errors,  is  intermediate  in  size  between  the  two, 
being  about  a  48mo,  somewhat  less  expensively  finished, 
bound  in  dark  leather,  with  a  plain  Roman  Cross 
stamped  on  the  front  cover.  These  books  were 
brought  through  the  blockade  to  Wilmington,  N.  C, 
upon  an  order  sent  out  by  a  number  of  North  Carolina 
clergymen,  who  agreed  to  send  a  bale  of  cotton,  or 
the  price  thereof,  from  their  several  parishes,  that  the 


102  THE    CHURCH 

cotton  might  be  sent  through  the  blockade  and  sold 
in  England,  and  the  proceeds  invested  in  Bibles  and 
Prayer  Books.  A  memorandum  of  the  purchase  and 
shipment  of  the  cotton,  in  the  handwriting  of  the  late 
Dr.  Armand  J.  DeRosset,  an  eminent  Churchman 
and  citizen  of  Wilmington,  who  purchased  and  shipped 
the  cotton,  is  extant,  preserved  by  the  late  Bishop 
Watson.  The  persons  concerned  in  this  transaction 
were  the  Rev.  Dr.  Richard  S.  Mason,  of  Christ  Church, 
Raleigh;  the  Rev.  Joseph  Blount  Cheshire,  of  Trinity 
Church,  Scotland  Neck;  the  Rev.  Alfred  A.  Watson, 
of  St.  James  Church,  Wilmington;  the  Rev.  Joseph  C. 
Huske,  of  St.  John's  Church,  Fayetteville;  and  the 
Rev.  Robert  B.  Sutton,  of  St.  Bartholomew's  Church, 
Pittsboro.  Mr.  John  Wilkes,  of  Charlotte,  and  Dr. 
Armand  J.  DeRosset  also  contributed  to  the  fund  for 
the  purchase  of  the  five  bales  of  cotton  which  were 
sent.  This  venture  proved  more  fortunate  than  that 
of  the  Richmond  publisher.  The  number  of  books 
purchased  is  not  known,  but  they  came  safe  through 
the  blockade,  and  were  eagerly  sought  for  and  used. 
Many  of  them  were  sent  to  the  soldiers  in  the  army, 
and  a  small  number  were  sent  to  each  of  the  parishes 
contributing  towards  their  purchase.  All  known 
copies  of  this  edition  w^ere  used  in  the  South  during 
the  War,  and  it  was  really  the  only  edition  of  a 
*' Confederate  Prayer  Book"kno^Ti  in  the  Confederacy . 
It  is  probable  that  all  these  books  w^ere  printed  from 
existing  plates  of  Eyre  &  Spottiswoode,  the  word 
*^ Confederate''  being  substituted  for  the  word  "United'* 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   103 

ill  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  and  in  the  Prayer  for 
Congress,  the  only  phices  where  the  word  occurs  in 
the  services  in  common  use.  If  new  types  had  been 
set  up,  the  other  places  would  probably  have  been 
noted  and  corrected.  It  was  perhaps  not  an  unhappy 
chance  which  left  the  word  ''United'''  in  as  many 
places  as  those  where  it  was  changed.  It  is  significant 
of  the  fact  that  the  separation  of  the  Church  in  the 
South  was  only  such  as  practical  necessity  made 
unavoidable  —  and  that  it  changed  as  little  as  possible 
of  its  usages  and  traditions. 

CHAPLAINS  IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  ARMY 

List    of    Clergymen    of  the    Church  who   served  as   Chap- 
lains IN  the  Army  op  the  Confederate  States 

The  following  list  is  doubtless  incomplete,  but  it  contains  the  names 
of  all  ichom  I  can  find  any  notice  of,  or  hear  of  after  inquiry. 

Diocese  of  Virginia 

1.  Rev.  Thomas  M.  Ambler 

2.  "  James  B.  Avirett 

3.  "  R.  J.  Baker 

4.  "  T.M.Boyd     4th  N.  C. 

5.  "  James  Carmichael 

6.  "  John  Cole     in  Hospital 

7.  "  J.  Cosby 

8.  "  R.T.Davis     6th  Va.  Cavalry 

9.  "  Thomas  Duncan     Md.  Line 

10.  "  Wm.  H.  Gardner    24th  Va. 

11.  "  R.  Gatewood 

12.  "  John  Griffin     19th  Va. 

13.  "  J.  C.  McCabe 

14.  "  John  McGill    52d  Va. 

15.  "  John  P.  McGuire 


104  THE    CHURCH 

16.  Rev.  Randolph  H.  McKim    2d  Va.  Cavalry 

17.  "  M.  Maury 

18.  "  W.  C.  Meredith 

19.  "  G.  H.  Norton 

20.  "  Edward  T.  Perkins 

21.  "  Alfred  M.  Randolph 

22.  "  P.  G.  Robert 2d  La.,  4th  Va.  Artl. 

23.  "  C.  P.  Rodifer 

24.  "  Aristides  S.  Smith      11th  N.  C. 

25.  "  Thompson  L.  Smith 

26.  "  K.  J.  Stewart 

27.  "  P.  Tinsley 

28.  "  Lyman  B.  WTiarton 

29.  "  George  T.  Williams 

Diocese  of  North  Carolina 

1.  Rev.  Jarvis  Buxton    Asheville  Hosp. 

2.  "  Frederick  Fitzgerald 

3.  "  Edwin  Geer     Post- Wilmington 

4.  "  Thos.  H.  Haughton   50th  N.  C. 

5.  "  Francis  W.  Hilliard    Post- Wilmington 

6.  "  Cameron  F.  MacRae     15th  N.  C. 

7.  "  Matthias  M.  Marshall 7th  N.  C. 

8.  "  Joseph  W.  Murphy    32d  &  43d  N.  C. 

9.  "  George  Patterson    3d  N.  C. 

10.  "  Girard  W.  Phelphs     17th  N.  C. 

11.  "  Bennett  Smedes      5th  N.  C. 

12.  "  John  C.  Tennant    32d  N.  C. 

13.  "  John  H.  Tillinghast   44th  N.  C. 

14.  "  Maurice  H.  Vaughan     3d  N.  C. 

15.  "  Alfred  A.  W^atson 2d  N.  C. 

Diocese  of  South  Carolina 
1.  Rev.  William  P.  DuBose     Kershaw's  Brigade 

Diocese  of  Georgia 

1.  Rev.  George  Easter 

2.  "    Wm.  T.  Helms 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   105 

Diocese  of  Georgia — Continued 

3.  Rev.  Telfair  Hodgson 

4.  "    llichurd  Johnson     1st  S.  C.  Cavalry 

5.  "    Jacquelin  M.  Meredith 

6.  "    Samuel  J.  Pinkerton      Atlanta  Hospital 

DiOCEBE   OF   FlORTOA 

1.  Rev.  J.  J.  Scott 

Diocese  of  Alabama 
1.  Rev.   J.  J.  Nicholson    Post  Chaplain 

Diocese  of  Mississippi 

1.  Rev.  Jno.  Chas.  Adams,  M.D.  (?) 

2.  "  Fred  W.  Damns     Hospital 

3.  "  M.  Elwcll 

4.  "  John  Gierlow 

5.  "  M.  Leander  Weller 

Diocese  of  Louisiana 

1.  Rev.  B.  S.  Dunn 

2.  "    Geo.W.  Stickney 

Diocese  of  Texas 

1.  Rev.  L.  H.  Jones     4th  Texas  Cavl. 

2.  "      H.  B.  Monges 

Diocese  of  Tennessee 

1.  Rev.  Wm.  Crane  Gray      4th  Term. 

2.  "       Chas.  Todd  Quintard 

3.  "      John  Miller  Schwrar     4th  Tenn. 


IV 

THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  NEGRO 

An  interesting  field  of  speculation  and  conjecture 
is  suggested  by  the  question:  What  would  have  been 
the  probable  effect  upon  the  institution  of  slavery, 
if  the  Confederate  States  had  become  a  settled  and 
independent  nation?  We  must,  I  think,  admit  that 
the  conditions  would  have  been  favorable  for  its  con- 
tinuance during  many  years.  The  whole  industrial 
system  of  the  South  was  based  on  slavery,  and  there 
w  ere  vast  unsettled  and  unimproved  regions  demanding 
for  their  first  occupation  the  kind  of  labor  which  slavery 
most  readily  supplies.  Furthermore,  the  complete 
and  wide  separation  between  master  and  slave,  not 
only  by  race  and  color,  but  by  intellectual,  moral,  and 
social  conditions,  qualities,  and  natural  capahilitiesy 
made  the  problem  of  emancipation  vastly  more  difficult 
than  had  ever  been  the  case  in  the  history  of  human 
development  in  the  past.  The  supreme  difficulty  was 
(and  it  remains  the  same)  that  the  negro,  when  freed, 
cannot  be  readily  and  thoroughly  taken  up  and  assimi- 
lated into  the  body  politic  and  social.  Further,  the 
fact  that  the  incidental  cause  of  the  War  between  the 
States  had  been  so  closely  associated  with  this  peculiar 
institution,  though  springing  ultimately  out  of  diver- 
gent theories  of  constitutional  construction,  would  for 

106 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   107 

some  years  have  added  a  strong  prejudicial  element 
to  the  problem  of  even  raising  the  question  as  to  any 
kind  of  dealing  with  slavery.  All  these  considerations 
would  seem  to  make  it  probable  that,  had  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  Confederate  States  been  permanently 
established,  slavery  would  for  many  years  have 
remained  the  peculiar  institution  of  the  country, 
determining  the  direction  of  its  industrial  and  com- 
mercial development,  and  modifying  its  social  institu- 
tions and  its  moral  and  intellectual  character. 

But,  assuming  the  continued  independent  existence 
of  the  nation,  and  some,  even  moderate,  degree  of 
prosperity,  such  as  might  not  unreasonably  be  looked 
for,  there  would  have  been  this  great  gain  for  those 
who  may  have  considered  slavery  as  a  present  necessary 
evil,  to  be  remedied  in  the  future:  that  the  people  of 
the  South  would  have  been  able  for  themselves  to  take 
up  the  subject,  and  to  give  it  their  serious  and  intelligent 
consideration,  free  from  the  distracting  and  exasperat- 
ing influences  of  outside  interference. 

The  South  had  not  always  been  united  upon  the 
question.  It  is  well  known  that  her  greatest  leaders 
in  the  first  period  of  independence  had  been  opposed 
to  slavery.  Washington  and  his  great  contemporaries 
desired  and  anticipated  its  gradual  abolition.  Many 
men  of  that  day  provided  in  their  wills  for  the  freeing 
of  their  slaves;  and  the  very  general  prevalence  of  this 
practice  seems  only  to  have  been  prevented,  in  Virginia 
at  least,  by  the  manifest  disadvantages  under  which  the 
free  colored  population  of  the  South  lay,  and  their 


108  THE    CHURCH 

apparent  inability  to  make  a  place  for  themselves  in 
the  progressive  life  of  the  community.  The  three 
thousand  free  blacks  in  Virginia,  at  the  close  of  the 
Revolution,  had  increased,  almost  entirely  by  manu- 
missions, to  thirteen  thousand  within  the  following  ten 
years,  and  to  thirty  thousand  in  the  next  twenty  years. 
This  rapid  increase,  and  the  manifest  disadvantage, 
no  less  to  the  free  negroes  themselves  than  to  the 
whites,  of  such  numbers  of  free  blacks  in  the  midst  of 
a  large  slave  population,  caused  the  enactment  of  a 
law  that  negroes  freed  after  1806  must  leave  the  State 
—  by  no  means  a  harsh  measure,  or  unjust,  when  we 
consider  the  immense  extent  of  unimproved  and  unoc- 
cupied lands  in  the  free  States  immediately  contiguous 
to  Virginia.  If  the  people  of  those  adjoining  free 
States  had  not  met  this  Virginia  law  with  the  most 
determined  efforts  to  prevent,  both  by  legislative 
enactment  and  by  lawless  violence,  the  settlement  of 
free  negroes  among  them,  Virginia  might  have  been  a 
free  State  itself  before  the  year  1861. 

The  most  rabid  abolitionist  of  the  Garrison  school 
never  more  passionately  protested  against  slavery,  or 
more  vehemently  denounced  it  as  unjust  and  deserving 
of  divine  vengeance,  than  did  Thomas  Jefferson  in 
his  "Notes  on  Virginia."  And  in  this  he  but  expressed 
a  sentiment  common,  in  varying  degrees  of  intensity, 
among  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  best  people  of 
his  State,  and  of  other  Southern  States  at  that  time. 
In  that  beautiful  sketch  of  a  noble  Southern  matron 
by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Andrews,  the  "Life  of  Mrs.  Page," 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   109 

is  a  striking  illustration  of  the  state  of  mind  of  a  large 
class  of  the  best  people  of  Virginia  towards  slavery. 
Mrs.  Page  was  an  elder  sister  of  Bishop  Meade,  and 
her  firm  and  exalted  character  was  not  without  influence 
in  the  development  of  the  character  of  her  brother. 
In  Mrs.  Page's  strong  feeling  of  repugnance  towards 
slavery,  and  in  her  high-minded  determination  and 
firm  judicious  action  to  shield  the  young  negro 
women  from  some  of  its  greatest  dangers,  we  have  a 
type  of  the  old-time  slave-owner  by  no  means  excep- 
tional. 

By  the  year  1832  popular  feeling  in  Virginia  had 
become  so  much  aroused  upon  the  evils  of  slavery,  that 
the  most  earnest  efforts  were  made  in  the  Legislature 
of  that  year  to  devise  some  just  and  practicable  means 
and  methods  for  its  abolition.  A  measure  for  gradual 
emancipation  failed  in  one  House  by  only  one  vote. 
A  majority  of  the  members  favored  such  a  policy. 
One  of  the  most  distinguished  members  of  that  body, 
in  the  course  of  the  great  debate  on  the  subject,  de- 
clared that  no  avowed  advocate  of  slavery  had  appeared 
on  that  floor  to  speak  for  it;  and  he  added,  that  the 
day  had  long  gone  by  "when  such  an  advocate  could 
be  listened  to  with  patience  or  even  forbearance." 

It  is  possible  that  even  then  the  institution  had 
become  too  thoroughly  incorporated  with  the  life  of 
the  community  to  allow  of  its  being  removed,  except 
by  some  such  violent  and  destructive  process  as  that 
w^hich  finally  effected  its  destruction.  However  that 
may  be,  the  course  of  events  immediately  following 


110  THE    CHURCH 

this  great  effort  in  Virginia,  checked,  and  then  all  but 
reversed,  the  course  of  popular  feeling  on  the  subject. 
Many  of  the  best  men,  however,  continued  to  be  of 
the  same  mind.  Virginia  was  headquarters  of  the  old 
Colonization  Society,  and  Bishop  Meade  was  among 
its  ablest  advocates  and  most  efficient  promoters.  He 
travelled  to  distant  Southern  States  laboring  in  this 
cause.  In  his  early  married  life  he  cultivated  his 
fields  with  the  labor  of  his  own  hands,  and  eventually 
he  freed  all  his  slaves.  Bishop  Atkinson  in  early  life 
freed  all  his  negroes  who  were  willing  to  go  to  the  free 
States,  keeping  only  those  who  preferred  to  remain  in 
Virginia  as  his  slaves.  It  is  said  that  in  Virginia  alone 
about  one  hundred  thousand  slaves  were  freed  by  their 
owners  between  the  end  of  the  Revolution  and  the  year 
1861.  It  is  a  strange  sight, — and  yet  characteristic  of 
the  man  and  of  his  race  —  to  see  General  Lee,  in  the 
midst  of  his  laborious  and  exhausting  duties,  and  in 
the  intervals  between  his  glorious  victories,  in  the 
year  1863,  taking  time  to  prepare  and  to  execute  the 
necessary  deeds  for  the  manumission  of  the  negroes 
of  the  Custis  estate. 

In  the  same  eventful  year  1832,  at  the  University  of 
North  Carolina,  Judge  William  Gaston,  at  that  time 
perhaps  the  foremost  citizen  of  the  State,  in  his  notable 
"Address  to  the  Literary  Societies,"  set  before  the 
young  men  of  the  University,  as  one  of  the  imperative 
duties  of  the  near  future,  the  deliverance  of  the  State 
from  the  evil  burden  of  slavery.  And  it  happened, 
by   a   strange   coincidence,    that   the   oration   of   the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   111 

Valedictorian  ^  of  the  Senior  Class  at  this  same  Com- 
mencement was  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  gradual 
abolition  of  slavery  in  North  Carolina.  These  facts 
are  significant  of  the  drift  of  opinion.  The  rise  about 
this  time  of  Abolition  Societies  in  the  North,  and  the 
struggle  over  the  presentation  of  the  Abolition  Petitions 
in  Congress,  were  important  influences  in  bringing 
about  that  change  of  popular  sentiment  which  within 
a  few  years  made  it  impossible  to  discuss,  or  to  consider, 
the  question  dispassionately  in  the  South.  Had  the 
Confederate  States  become  permanently  independent, 
it  would  have  become  possible  for  the  South  to  reopen 
the  question,  and  to  ask  herself  what  her  true  interest 
and  her  permanent  welfare  and  prosperity  did  demand 
of  her  in  settling  it. 

The  Church  of  Christ  should  be  the  conscience  of 
the  nation,  and  in  a  very  real  degree  it  always  has  been. 
One  of  the  invariable  results  of  the  prevalence  of 
Christianity  has  been  the  ultimate  disappearance  of 
slavery,  in  the  countries  brought  under  its  influence. 
But  it  has  never  sought  this  end  by  revolution,  nor  by 
imperative  canonical  action,  nor  by  the  direct  operation 
of  ecclesiastical  censures.  It  has  seemed  to  treat 
slavery  as  an  incidental  encumbrance,  character- 
istic of  certain  stages  of  social  progress,  to  be 
gradually  ameliorated,  and  so  improved  out  of  exist- 
ence, in  the  vital  processes  of  moral  and  social 
development. 

^  John  Haywood  Parker,  afterwards  the  beloved  rector  of 
St.  Luke's  Church,  Salisbury,  N.  C. 


112  THE    CHURCH 

Perhaps  the  most  familiar  instance  of  this,  and  the 
one  which  comes  nearest  to  us,  is  seen  in  the  early  his- 
tory of  England.  Though  fortunately  not  separated 
by  color,  race,  or  essential  social  characteristics,  the 
early  English  social  order  included  both  bondmen  and 
freemen.  And  the  distinction  did  not  wholly  disappear 
until  comparatively  modern  times.  The  ''villeins 
regardant''  and  the  ''villeins  in  gross,''  of  whom  we 
read  in  our  commentaries  on  the  Common  Law,  were 
a  kind  of  slaves,  whose  chains  and  fetters  had  for  the 
most  part  been  broken  by  the  time  of  the  Reformation, 
but  who  had  still  some  marks  of  servitude  remaining, 
and  some  loose  links  hanging  upon  them,  when  Lord 
Coke  published  his  Commentary  on  Littleton.  And, 
so  far  as  I  recall,  the  Church  of  England  never  pro- 
ceeded by  canonical  legislation  in  her  efforts  to  rescue 
the  slave,  and  to  make  him  a  free  man.  In  fact,  in 
the  many  broad  manors  owned  by  the  old  monasteries 
and  Prelates  of  England,  thousands  of  these  customary 
and  manorial  serfs  added  to  the  wealth  and  power  of 
the  Church.  ^  But,  with  whatever  of  fault  or  incon- 
sistency, the  Church  was  all  the  time  an  influence  for 
human  freedom  and  the  emancipation  of  the  slave. 

1  Blackstone  has  a  curious  passage  in  this  connection:  "For  Sir 
Thomas  Smith  testifies,  that  in  all  his  time  (and  he  was  Secretary  to 
Edward  VI)  he  never  knew  any  villein  in  gross  throughout  the  realm; 
and  the  few  villeins  regardant  that  were  then  remaining,  were  such 
only  as  belonged  to  bishops,  monasteries,  or  other  ecclesiastical  cor- 
porations, in  the  preceding  times  of  popery.  For  he  tells  us  that  'the 
holy  fathers,  monks,  and  friars  had  in  their  confessions,  and  especially 
in  their  extreme  and  deadly  sickness,  convinced  the  laity  how  danger- 


I  N 


THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES       113 


And  her  influence  operated  chiefly  in  two  closely 
related  ways:  first,  she  taught,  and  in  some  degree 
enforced  in  practice,  the  idea  of  Christiaji  brotherhood, 
the  oneness  of  all  men  in  Christ;  and  second,  she  intro- 
duced certain  principles  of  social  order  and  of  Christian 
duty,  especially  the  sanctity  of  Marriage  and  the 
family  relation,  and  the  obligation  of  personal  purity, 
involving  a  distinct  element  of  personal  freedom. 
And  these  two  lines  of  influence,  working  upon  both 
master  and  serf,  in  the  end  wrought  out  freedom  for 
both  from  that  institution,  which  has  been  a  tem- 
porary element  in  the  development  of  almost  every 
people. 

The  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  found  itself 
in  such  a  relationship  w^ith  slavery  as  perhaps  never 
had  existed  before.  The  whole  domestic  and  social 
life  of  the  country,  as  well  as  its  agricultural  interests, 
depended  upon  the  service  and  labor  of  the  slaves; 
and  the  clergy  were  as  much  involved  in  the  practical 
workings  of  the  institution  as  w^ere  the  laity.  By  the 
unfortunate  course  w^iich  the  controversy  had  taken, 
it  had  become  a  point  of  honor  and  of  patriotism  to 
maintain  its  utility  as  well  as  its  lawfulness.     To  have 

ous  a  practice  it  was,  for  one  christian  man  to  hold  another  in  bondage; 
so  that  temporal  men,  by  little  and  little,  by  reason  of  that  terror  in 
their  conscience,  were  glad  to  manumit  all  their  villeins.  But  the 
said  holy  fathers,  with  the  abbots  and  priors,  did  not  in  like  sort  by 
theirs;  for  they  also  had  a  scruple  in  conscience  to  impoverish  and 
despoil  the  Church  so  much  as  to  manumit  such  as  were  bond  to 
their  Churches,  or  to  the  manors  which  the  Church  had  gotten;  and 
so  kept  their  villeins  still.'" 

9 


114  THE    CHURCH 

attacked  the  institution  of  slavery,  in  the  prevalent 
state  of  public  feeling,  would  have  seemed,  and  in 
effect  would  have  been,  treason  to  the  Southern  cause. 
In  the  actual  state  of  public  affairs,  those  least  desirous 
of  the  perpetuation  of  slavery  could  not  help  seeing, 
that  the  times  were  most  unsuitable  for  the  discussion 
or  consideration  of  its  continuance. 

In  this  crisis  of  public  interests,  and  in  this  temper 
of  the  public  mind,  in  the  Church  and  in  the  nation, 
it  is  interesting  and  gratifying,  not  to  say  surprising, 
to  find  that,  in  her  first  regular  synodical  gathering, 
the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  sounded  a  clear 
and  strong  note  of  exhortation  and  of  warning,  and 
with  instinctive  precision  touched  the  two  points 
which  from  the  beginning  had  been  the  cardinal  points 
in  her  work  for  the  elevation  of  man  in  his  social  life  — 
the  fact  of  universal  brotherhood  in  Christ,  and  the 
divine  character  and  obligation  of  the  family  relation- 
ship. The  first  resolution  adopted  by  the  House  of 
Deputies  of  the  General  Council  of  1862,  upon  the 
subject  of  the  Church's  work  within  her  own  borders, 
is  as  follows:  "That  this  Church  desires  specially  to 
recognize  its  obligation  to  provide  for  the  spiritual 
wants  of  that  class  of  our  brethren,  who  in  the  provi- 
dence of  God,  have  been  committed  to  our  sympathy 
and  care  by  the  national  institution  of  slavery.'* 
First  of  all  the  Church  thus  recognized  the  fact  of 
Christian  brotherhood  in  the  slave.  "  That  class  of 
our  brethren/*  is  the  phrase  by  which  she  designates 
him,  and  declares  his  status  in  the  Church:    thus  the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   115 

House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.  The  Pastoral 
Letter  of  the  House  of  Bishops  is  equally  emphatic 
on  the  other  point.  Moreover,  the  language  of  the 
Bishops  is  remarkable  for  its  suggestion  of  a  future 
development  and  a  providential  work  lying  before  the 
negroes  ''as  a  people.''  There  is  some  inexactness  in 
the  construction  of  the  sentence,  but  such  is  my  under- 
standing of  its  meaning.  After  stating  in  strong  terms 
the  duty  of  the  Church  to  the  slaves,  and  the  impossi- 
bility of  separating  the  interests  and  the  fortunes  of 
the  two  races,  it  speaks  of  them  as  "this  sacred  trust 
committed  to  us,  as  a  people  to  be  prepared  for  the  work 
which  God  may  have  for  them  to  do  in  the  future.''  The 
Pastoral  Letter  then  proceeds  to  urge  "upon  the  mas- 
ters of  the  country  their  obligation,  as  Christian  men, 
so  to  arrange  this  institution  as  not  to  necessitate  the 
violation  of  those  sacred  relations  which  God  has 
created,  and  which  man  cannot,  consistently  with 
Christian  duty,  annul." 

Thus  did  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States,  in 
its  very  first  synodical  gathering,  set  forth  these  two 
principles.  Christian  brotherhood  and  the  divine  obli- 
gation of  the  family  relationship,  out  of  which  have 
come  the  regeneration  of  human  society,  and  the 
amelioration  and  gradual  elimination  of  slavery  out  of 
the  social  system. 

Not  only  did  the  Church  in  its  legislative  council 
thus  formally  declare  itself,  but  there  is  no  lack  of 
evidence  that  this  synodical  utterance  expressed  what 
was  in  the  mind  and  conscience  of  the  people.     In 


116  THE    CHURCH 

every  Diocese  of  the  South,  in  one  form  or  another,  we 
find  evidence  of  an  increasing  sense  of  obligation  in 
respect  to  the  welfare  and  spiritual  enlightenment  of  the 
slave.  In  the  Church  press  appeared  long  and  earnest 
articles,  dealing  with  his  place  in  the  Church,  and  the 
adaptation  of  the  Church's  methods  to  his  needs,  and 
urging  the  importance  of  such  modifications  in  the 
institution  of  slavery  as  Christian  people  should  make, 
for  the  elevation  of  his  character  and  the  improvement 
of  his  condition.  In  a  series  of  long  and  able  editorials, 
continuing  through  the  summer  and  fall  of  the  year 
1861,  the  Church  Intelligencer  discussed  the  several 
aspects  of  this  question:  the  suitableness  of  the 
Church's  worship  and  teaching  to  the  negro;  methods 
of  work  and  instruction,  illustrated  by  notable  exam- 
ples in  different  parts  of  the  South;  and  the  special 
obligations  arising  out  of  the  circumstances  of  that 
critical  time.  In  its  issue  of  August  30,  1861,  in  an 
article  entitled  "The  Legal  Status  of  Slaves,"  occurs 
this  passage: 

''Men,  whose  memory  runs  back  thirty  years,  or  a 
little  more,  will  easily  call  to  mind  a  state  of  public 
feeling  then  existing  such  that  the  great  body  of  our 
people  of  all  parties,  and  of  all  sects,  were  ready  and 
eager  to  adopt  every  safe  measure  that  would  tend  to 
ameliorate  and  elevate  the  condition  of  our  servile 
population.  Many,  no  doubt,  looked  forward  to  more 
than  this.  .  .  .  This  hopeful  condition  of  affairs  was 
suddenly  changed,  and  in  a  few  years  few  persons  could 
be  found  who  thought    it  expedient    and  proper  to 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   117 

attempt  those  alterations  which  tliemselves  had  so 
recently  advocated  and  so  heartily  desired.  The  influ- 
ence which  wrought  this  great  change  of  public  senti- 
ment among  us,  operated  on  us  almost  entirely  from 
abroad.  The  change  of  feeling  at  home  sprung  from 
a  change  of  policy  elsewhere. 

*'But  this  condition  of  affairs  is  also  now  changed. 
The  recent  independence  of  the  Southern  States  has 
shut  out  mainly  such  foreign  influence.  The  system 
of  slavery  is  now,  and  is  henceforth  to  be,  entirely  in 
our  own  hands,  and  under  our  control,  and  whatever 
responsibilities  belong  to  it  are  ours  only.  .  .  . 

"Now  we  have  an  opportunity,  such  as  in  the  his- 
toid of  this  people  has  never  been.  .  .  .  Let  then 
our  politicians  lay  aside  their  party  contests  and  ad- 
dress themselves  to  this  great  w^ork.  .  .  .  Let  them 
feel  that  on  them  rests  a  fearful  responsibility  to  man 
and  to  God.  .  .  .  Let  them  consult  reason,  and  ex- 
perience, and  most  of  all  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ. 
.  .  .  How  far  the  war  under  which  we  are  now 
suffering  is  the  consequence  and  the  penalty  of  our 
neglect  of  duty  in  this  matter,  is  a  grave  question." 
And  then,  coming  to  the  practical  question  thus  intro- 
duced, it  proceeds:  "Our  laws  do  not  recognize  the 
marriage  relation  among  slaves.  This  omission  seems 
to  have  been  thus  far  intentional.  It  is  part  of  the 
traditional  policy  of  the  system.  We  have  adopted 
it,  as  the  other  nations  of  modern  times  have  done, 
from  the  Civil  Law.  .  .  .  But  that  such  a  state  of 
things  should  exist  among  us,  should  have  been  so 


118  THE    CHURCH 

long  endured  by  the  Christian  consciousness  of  our 
people,  is  a  strange  thing  indeed.  .  .  .  We  would 
commend  this,  and  the  like  evils  in  the  existing  con- 
dition of  affairs,  to  those  who  have  the  rule  over  us. 
They  deserve  deliberate  thought  and  a  vigorous  effort." 
Thus,  before  Bishops  or  Council  had  formally  spoken, 
we  see  the  mind  and  conscience  of  the  Church 
working 

This  feeling  was  general  among  the  best  people 
throughout  the  South.  The  Baptist  Association  of 
Georgia,  in  1864,  adopted  a  resolution  setting  forth 
in  very  strong  terms  the  duty  of  recognizing,  and  pro- 
tecting by  legislative  enactment,  the  marriage  of 
slaves,  concluding:  "that  the  law  of  Georgia,  in  its 
failure  to  regulate  and  protect  this  relationship  between 
our  slaves,  is  essentially  defective  and  ought  to  be 
amended." 

The  Southern  PresbyteriaUy  the  leading  newspaper 
of  that  very  intelligent  and  conservative  communion, 
referring  with  strong  approval  to  the  foregoing  resolu- 
tion, says:  "This  subject  is  engaging  a  good  deal  of 
attention  at  the  present  time.  The  Christian  con- 
science of  the  Southern  people  has  been,  in  some  meas- 
ure, awakened  to  its  importance,  and  not  a  few  voices 
are  emboldened,  even  amid  all  the  trials  and  terrors  of 
the  present  war,  to  speak  out  earnestly  the  convictions 
of  Christian  hearts.  We  believe  that  slavery  prevents 
more  separations  of  husbands  and  wives  among  the 
blacks,  than  it  causes.  We  believe  that  there  is  less 
conjugal   infidelity,   fewer   conjugal   separations,   and 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   110 

more  conjugal  ha{)pincss  among  them,  than  there 
would  be  if  they  were  free.^  We  believe  that  when 
a  slave  man  and  a  slave  woman  in  good  faith 
take  each  other  to  be  husband  and  wife,  it  is  marriage 
in  the  sight  of  God  and  man,  and  it  docs  not  require 
the  laws  of  the  State  to  make  it  so.  But  our  laws 
wholly  ignore  that  relation  among  our  slaves,  and  they 
give  the  master  i)owcr  to  separate  the  husband  and  wife, 
not  directly  and  explicitly,  but  by  the  power  they  give 
to  control  the  local  habitation  of  the  slave.  This  is 
what  troubles  Christian  consciences." 

The  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  of  Savannah,  much 
about  the  same  time,  gave  public  expression  of  his 
views  at  some  length  upon  this  same  question.  Among 
other  things  he  said:  '*This  leads  me  to  another  con- 
dition on  the  subject  kindred  to  the  preceding.  It  is 
that  matrimonial  relations  be  observed  among  slaves, 
and  that  the  laws  of  marriage  be  enforced  among 
them.  ...  I  leave  it  to  the  conscience,  reason,  and 
good  sense  of  any  upright  and  virtuous  man,  whether 
God  can  bless  a  country  and  a  state  of  things,  in  which 
there  is  a  woful  disregard  of  the  holy  laws  of  marriage." 

Thus  we  see  that,  no  sooner  was  the  institution  of 
slavery  removed  from  the  field  of  political  contention, 

^  This  estimate  has  been  fully  justified  by  the  experience  of  the 
forty-five  years  of  negro  freedom  since  1865.  Separations  between 
husband  and  wife,  with  a  general  disregard  of  conjugal  and  parental 
obligations,  have  been  very  greatly  more  prevalent  up  to  the 
present  time  among  the  negroes,  than  was  ever  the  case  under  the 
system  of  slavery.  Such  at  least  is  the  opinion  of  all  well-informed 
persons  with  whom  the  writer  has  conferred  on  this  subject. 


120  THE    CHURCH 

than,  as  a  first  effect,  the  public  mind  and  concience 
began  to  move  along  those  lines  of  reform,  which  sug- 
gest, not  only  immediate  improvement  in  the  condi- 
tion of  the  slave,  but  the  possibility  of  his  ultimate 
complete  enfranchisement  through  the  normal  pro- 
cesses of  social  development. 

He  who  knows  anything  of  those  few  crowded  and 
bloody  years,  when  the  South,  overwhelmed  by  num- 
bers, exhausted  in  resources,  and  drained  of  her  noblest 
manhood,  was  making  her  desperate  struggle  for 
national  existence,  will  not  be  surprised  that  no  great 
results  were  accomplished  in  any  work  of  internal 
social  development.  But  it  may  justly  be  said  that 
the  Church,  in  declaring  its  principles  and  in  laying 
out  its  policy,  did  what  it  could,  and  vindicated  its 
claim  to  be  a  living  branch  of  the  true  Vine;  it  was 
like  the  scribe  instructed  unto  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
and,  for  the  necessities  of  that  trying  hour,  and  to 
meet  the  demands  of  the  future,  it  brought  forth  out 
of  its  treasures  things  new  and  old. 

Although  no  time  was  allowed  for  any  change  or 
improvement  in  the  institution  of  slavery,  much  work 
continued  to  be  carried  on  along  the  old  lines  of  pas- 
toral ministrations  and  domestic  instructions.  The 
Convention  Addresses  of  Southern  Bishops  and  the 
meagre  parochial  reports  of  the  clergy,  for  many  years 
before  the  War,  abound  in  references  to  the  work  of 
the  clergy  and  of  the  masters  and  mistresses  for  the 
slaves.  In  almost  every  parish  church  a  certain  part 
of  the  building  was  reserved  for  them,  and  in  many, 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   121 

special  services  were  arranged  for  them.  In  the  parish 
church  in  which  I  had  the  happiness  to  be  brought  up 
the  Sunday  service  in  the  forenoon  was  for  the  white 
congregation,  and  the  afternoon  service  was  for  the 
colored  congregation,  c^uite  as  numerous  as  the  white. 
If  colored  people  attended  the  former  service,  as  they 
usually  did,  they  had  seats  in  the  back  of  the  church: 
if  white  people  attended  the  afternoon  service,  they 
sat  in  the  gallery.  On  some  of  the  large  plantations 
churches  were  built  for  the  negroes,  and  in  many 
cases,  notably,  I  believe,  in  South  Carolina,  special 
clergymen  served  these  churches.  In  their  private 
religious  instruction  Christian  parents  sometimes 
taught  all  the  children  of  the  household,  white  and 
black,  together:  ^  in  other  cases,  where,  as  on  planta- 
tions, there  were  many  negro  children,  a  Sunday-school 
for  the  negro  children  would  be  taught  at  the  "great 
house"  or  at  the  "quarters."  Catechisms  "for  those 
who  cannot  read"  were  published  with  special  refer- 
ence to  the  instruction  of  colored  people.  In  the 
period  just  preceding  the  War  many  of  the  negroes 
were  coming  into  the  Church.  In  South  Carolina 
especially  the  work  of  the  Church  among  them  was 
extensive  and  effective.  In  the  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  State  of  the  Church,  in  the  General 
Convention  of  1859,  w^e  find  this  passage  relating  to 
South  Carolina: 

"About  fifty  chapels,  for  the  benefit  of  negroes  on 

^  The  writer  was  thus  taught  by  his  mother  every  Sunday  after- 
noon,—  he  and  his  brother  and  all  the  colored  children  on  the  place. 


122  THE    CHURCH 

plantations,  are  now  in  use  for  the  worship  of  God  and 
the  rehgious  instruction  of  slaves.  Many  planters 
employ  Missionaries  or  Catechists  for  this  purpose; 
many  more  would  do  so,  if  it  were  possible  to  procure 
them.  Some  of  the  candidates  for  Holy  Orders  are 
looking  forward  to  this  special  work.  In  one  parish 
(All  Saints',  Waccamaw)  are  thirteen  chapels  for 
negroes,  supplied  with  regular  services.  The  number 
of  negroes  attending  the  services  of  the  Church  in  this 
Diocese  cannot  be  shown  by  statistics;  it  is  very  large, 
and  increasing  annually." 

So  successful  had  this  work  been  in  South  Carolina 
that  the  colored  communicants  were  almost  equal  to 
the  whites  in  number;  the  colored  baptisms  greatly 
exceeded  the  white;  the  confirmations  varied,  some- 
times greater  in  number  among  the  whites,  sometimes 
among  the  negroes.  In  1861  the  diocesan  Journal 
shows  2979  white  communicants  and  2973  colored,  a 
difference  of  only  six! 

This  work  in  South  Carolina  suffered  very  greatly 
by  the  War,  so  much  of  the  seacoast,  where  the  negroes 
were  most  numerous  and  the  work  of  the  Church 
amongst  them  most  extensive,  being  at  an  early  stage 
of  hostilities  occupied  by  the  Federal  forces.  And  it 
was  the  same  in  many  other  States.  But  the  work 
did  not  at  all  cease  or  slacken  where  the  Church  and 
its  people  were  free  to  carry  it  on.  No  general  sta- 
tistics have  been  preserved  by  which  the  exact  extent 
and  the  full  fruits  of  such  labors  may  be  known  and 
exhibited;   but  all  through  the  diocesan  Journals,  and 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   123 

Episcopal  addresses,  and  Church  papers  of  those 
times,  are  references  to  the  work,  and  accounts  of 
services,  and  reports  of  ministrations,  abundantly 
manifesting  the  faithfulness  of  clergy  and  people  in 
the  performance  of  this  part  of  their  duty.  In  1802 
Bishop  Davis  reports  C33  colored  baptisms  in  the 
Diocese,  and  eighty-three  confirmations;  in  May,  18G4, 
for  the  fifteen  months  preceding,  he  reports  in  his 
Diocese  1210  colored  baptisms  and  350  confirmations! 
This  is  very  much  in  excess  of  the  work  in  any  other 
Diocese,  and  is  a  noble  tribute  to  the  Bishop  of  South 
Carolina  and  his  clergy. 

The  Rev.  Alexander  Glennie,  of  All  Saints'  Parish, 
Waccamaw,  was  especially  known  for  his  successful 
work  among  the  negroes  of  the  large  plantations  of  his 
extensive  parish.  In  January,  1862,  he  sent  to  Bishop 
Atkinson  a  letter,  WTitten  at  the  Bishop's  request, 
describing  briefly  his  methods  of  work,  which  the 
Bishop  of  North  Carolina  published,  for  the  encourage- 
ment and  guidance  of  his  own  people  engaged  in  the 
same  kind  of  effort.  Mr.  Glennie  says  that  the  plan- 
tations in  his  parish  extended  for  thirty  miles  along 
the  river.  He  speaks  of  having  at  times  employed 
two  assistants  in  the  work.  With  these  he  had  services 
on  eight  plantations  each  Sunday.  His  method  was 
to  train  his  negroes  so  that  they  might  enjoy  habit- 
ually the  full  service  of  the  Church,  teaching  them  all 
the  responses  and  Canticles,  and  also  some  of  the 
"Selections  of  Psalms,"  to  be  used  as  a  substitute  for 
the  Psalms  for  the  day.     In  preaching,  he  says,  he 


124  THE    CHURCH 

broke  up  his  sermon  into  short  sections,  and  at  the  end 
of  each  section  paused,  and  before  going  on  catechised 
the  adult  members  of  the  congregation  upon  what  he 
had  been  saying,  thus  taking  them  through  the  whole 
sermon  in  this  catechetical  exercise.  The  children  were 
catechised  on  week-days  on  the  plantations,  an  hour 
or  an  hour  and  a  half  being  given  to  this  work  every 
two  weeks  on  each  plantation.  To  keep  the  children 
interested,  the  work  of  instruction  was  enlivened  by 
frequent  singing  of  hymns.  The  basis  of  his  instruc- 
tion to  the  children  was  the  Church  Catechism,  with 
questions  and  answers  explaining  and  illustrating  it, 
by  the  Rev.  Paul  Trapier,  and  questions  and  answers 
on  the  Prayer  Book  prepared  by  himself.  On  some 
plantations  the  master  and  mistress  of  the  family 
actively  engaged  in  the  religious  instruction  of  the 
negroes,  and  the  good  effect  of  this  was  always  most 
marked.  He  speaks  of  one  plantation  on  which  a 
catechist  had  been  employed  since  the  death  of  the 
former  owner,  who  had  been  very  devoted  to  the  work 
himself.  Sometimes  the  masters  and  mistresses  as- 
sumed the  responsibility  of  being  godparents  for  the 
negro  children  at  their  baptism,  sometimes  the  parents 
and  friends  of  the  children. 

On  the  large  plantations  efforts  were  made  to 
require  the  negroes  to  be  regularly  married  by  the  cler- 
gyman, and  to  protect  them  in  the  married  relation; 
and  Mr.  Glennie  expresses  the  hope  that  there  may 
soon  be  proper  legislation  to  prevent  the  separation 
of  husband  and  wife.     Chapels  had  been  built  on  many 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   125 

of  the  plantations,   sonic  of  these  being  better  than 
many  parish  churches. 

When  the  negroes  resided  near  enough  to  attend  at 
the  parish  church,  they  received  the  Connnunion  there, 
on  the  regular  days  of  its  celebration,  with  their  mas- 
ters and  mistresses  and  the  white  congregation;  those 
at  a  distance  attended  regular  celebrations  in  the 
plantation  chapels.  When  he  was  ordained  in  1832, 
there  were  ten  colored  communicants  in  the  parish; 
there  had  been  added  during  his  ministry  509;  the 
present  number  was  289.  With  such  work  as  this 
going  on,  it  is  easy  to  understand  how  the  numbers  of 
colored  communicants  in  South  Carolina,  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  War,  had  come  to  be  practically  equal 
to  the  number  of  the  whites. 

And  in  some  measure  the  same  interest  and  activity 
in  the  work  appears  in  almost  all  the  Dioceses.  Even 
in  the  Empire  Diocese  of  Texas  the  overworked  Mis- 
sionary Bishop  finds  time,  in  the  midst  of  his  intermi- 
nable journeys,  to  manifest  his  interest  in  the  negroes; 
and  to  his  Convention  of  1863  he  holds  up  the  example 
of  the  Primitive  Church  in  its  care  for  the  slave,  and 
with  much  satisfaction  calls  their  attention  to  the  fact 
that,  of  the  110  baptisms  he  reports,  thirty  were  of 
negro  children. 

In  Mississippi  Bishop  Green  found  many  of  his 
people  in  full  sympathy  with  him  in  his  desire  and  pur- 
pose to  make  the  Church  a  faithful  mother  to  the  black 
people  no  less  than  to  the  white.  The  situation  in 
1861  is  thus  stated  in  the  report  of  a  committee  of  the 


126  THE    CHURCH 

Convention  of  the  Diocese  in  1865:  "Several  of  our 
clergy  had  become  deeply  interested  in,  and  were 
laboring  with  great  success  among  the  servants;  quite 
a  number  of  beautiful  chapels  had  been  erected  in 
various  parts  of  the  Diocese,  for  their  use  by  pious 
masters  and  mistresses,  who  either  themselves  devoted 
every  Lord's  Day  to  their  religious  instruction,  or 
provided  them  with  the  services  of  a  clergyman. 
There  was  a  growing  attachment  among  them  to 
our  mode  of  worship;  the  number  of  communicants 
was  steadily  increasing,  and  it  was  acknowledged  by 
reflecting  men  of  other  communions  that  the  sober 
services  of  the  Church,  and  our  system  of  religious 
instruction,  were  unquestionably  the  best  adapted  to 
the  constitution  and  condition  of  this  class.'* 

Bishop  Green's  Journal  abounds  in  such  entries  as 
the  following :  Baptized  at  Mrs.  Ann  Barrow's  twenty- 
nine  negro  children,  the  mistress  standing  Godmother 
for  them  all.  "If  there  be  any  'curse'  attendant  on 
slavery,  as  it  exists  among  us,  it  is  the  neglect  of  masters 
and  mistresses,  and  the  INEnisters  of  Christ,  to  provide 
for  the  spiritual  welfare  of  those  whose  souls,  as  well 
as  bodies,  are  committed  to  our  care;"  confirmed 
seven  of  Mr.  Laughlin's  servants  at  his  house,  prepared 
by  their  mistress;  at  Mrs.  Grifiith's  baptized  four 
negro  children,  confirmed  five;  at  Mrs.  Mercer's  bap- 
tized nineteen;  ministered  to  a  crowded  congregation 
who  joined  heartily  in  the  responses.  Upon  failing 
to  keep  an  appointment  to  visit  the  plantation  of 
Col.  George  S.  Yerger,  recently  deceased,  he  WTites: 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   127 

"I  could  with  difficulty  shake  off  the  feeling  of  unfaith- 
fulness," although  it  was  the  breaking  down  of  the 
steamboat  which  caused  him  to  miss  the  appointment. 
And  he  goes  on  to  express  his  tender  solicitude  for 
"those  poor  blacks,  for  whose  spiritual  welfare  he 
[Colonel  Yerger]  had  labored  with  more  of  a  father's 
than  a  master's  care."  He  held  service  upon  another 
occasion  in  the  parlor  at  the  house  of  Mrs.  Bailey 
and  confirmed  seven  of  her  servants.  After  the  service 
the  negroes  w^ho  had  been  confirmed  presented  the 
Bishop  with  a  handsome  private  "Communion  set"! 
To  his  Convention  of  1861  he  reports  having  himself 
baptized,  during  the  preceding  year,  nine  colored  adults 
and  ninety-six  infants.  And  his  work  among  the 
negroes  continued  until  his  Diocese  began  to  be  over- 
run, and  his  Episcopal  labors  limited  and  hindered,  by 
the  destructive  experiences  of  hostile  invasion. 

In  Alabama  the  Committee  on  the  State  of  the 
Church  in  1863  mention  the  increased  interest  of  the 
clergy  in  work  among  the  negroes,  and  the  report  of 
the  Committee  urges  the  clergy  to  be  faithful  in  press- 
ing upon  all  masters  their  religious  duty  to  their  slaves. 
In  the  Bishop's  address  in  1864  he  mentions  confirm- 
ing on  one  plantation,  Faunsdale,  Marengo  County, 
twenty  negroes  at  one  service.  Bishop  Green  visited 
this  same  plantation  in  1862,  and  mentions  the  chapel 
built  for  the  negroes  by  the  owner  (Mrs.  Harrison, 
afterwards  Mrs.  Stickney)  as  *'a  finished  specimen 
of  Ecclesiastical  architecture."  Special  interest  and 
importance  attaches  to  this  work  in  the  Dioceses  of 


128  THE    CHURCH 

Mississippi  and  Alabama,  because  of  the  comparative 
weakness  of  the  Church,  and  the  great  preponderance 
of  the  black  people,  in  those  States. 

There  was  little  or  no  difference  of  opinion  among 
the  masters  or  others,  as  to  the  reality  and  value  of 
this  work  among  the  negroes,  though  so  little  of  it 
seemed  to  survive  the  terrible  experience  of  emanci- 
pation, "Reconstruction,"  and  the  introduction  of  the 
negro  of  the  South  as  an  important  political  element 
in  our  national  economy.  It  was  good  work  which 
was  done  among  them  before  and  during  the  War,  by 
godly  masters  and  mistresses  and  faithful  clergymen, 
judged  by  the  strictest  moral  and  spiritual  tests.  One 
of  its  invariable  effects  was  the  creation  of  a  strong 
sympathetic  bond  of  attachment  between  master  and 
slave,  as  illustrated  in  the  following  instance.  Mr. 
Josiah  Collins,  whose  sister  Mrs.  Harrison  has  been 
mentioned  as  the  owner  of  Faunsdale  Plantation,  in 
Marengo  County,  Alabama,  and  the  builder  of  the 
beautiful  chapel  for  her  slaves,  resided  upon  a  large 
plantation  known  as  "the  Lake,"  on  Lake  Scupper- 
nong,  in  Washington  County,  N.  C.  Having  a  large 
number  of  slaves,  he  built  upon  his  plantation  a  church 
for  his  own  family  and  people,  and  paid  the  salary  of  a 
clergyman  who  devoted  himself  to  the  work  as  his 
parish.  For  years  before  the  War  a  succession  of  able 
and  cultivated  men  ministered  to  this  congregation, 
maintaining  not  only  the  regular  Sunday  service  and 
the  due  celebration  of  all  feasts  and  fasts  of  the  Church, 
but  usually  having  also  a  daily  service,  which  was  well 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   129 

attended  by  those  not  necessarily  engaged  in  other 
duties.  They  also  diligently  instructed  both  old  and 
young  in  Catechism,  Bible,  and  Prayer  Book.  When 
the  eastern  section  of  the  State,  including  Washington 
County,  had  been  brought  within  the  power  of  the 
Federal  forces,  and  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  prevent 
the  negroes  from  leaving  their  owners  when  they 
chose  to  do  so,  the  Collins  negroes,  following  their 
clergyman,^  abandoned  the  plantation,  and,  transport- 
ing their  children  and  their  household  stuff  in  the 
farm  wagons,  removed  several  days'  journey,  a  hun- 
dred and  twenty-five  miles  inland,  to  Franklin  County, 
beyond  the  reach  of  the  Federal  forces.  Bishop 
Atkinson,  in  his  Convention  Address  of  1864,  mentions 
visiting  them,  and  preaching  to  them  under  the  trees 
in  their  new  abode,  December  18,  1863. 

A  word  should  be  said  of  a  very  faithful  class  of 
negroes,  those  who  accompanied  their  masters  to  the 
War.  The  personal  bond  between  master  and  servant 
in  this  case  was  peculiarly  close,  and  the  latter  very 
often  showed  an  almost  maternal  care  and  solicitude 
in  providing  for  the  comfort  and  welfare  of  his  master. 
With  every  opportunity  of  escaping  to  the  enemy, 
where  freedom  was  assured,  there  were  very  few  in- 
stances of  it.  The  only  one  which  I  know  of  person- 
ally was  caused  by  ill-treatment  of  the  servant  during 
his  master's  absence.  And  years  afterwards,  after  the 
master's  death,  came  a  letter  from  distant  Kansas,  in 
which  the  runaway  servant  explained  to  his  master 
^  The  Rev.  George  Patterson. 
10 


130  THE    CHURCH 

the  cause  of  his  desertion,  protesting  that  nothing  would 
have  tempted  him  to  leave,  if  his  master  had  been  in 
the  camp  at  the  time  to  protect  him.  Some  months 
ago  I  confirmed  an  old  white-headed  colored  man  in 
Stokes  County,  N.  C.  I  was  struck  with  his  distin- 
guished manner  and  venerable  appearance.  Upon 
learning  his  name  I  found  that  I  had  often  heard  of 
him  from  his  old  mistress,  and  this  is  what  she  had  told 
me.  The  old  man,  John  Goolsby,  was  body-servant 
to  her  husband,  the  late  Major  Peter  W.  Hairston, 
during  the  War.  He  was  very  high  in  his  master's 
confidence,  and  was  well  known  among  his  master's 
friends  for  his  intelligence  and  integrity  of  character. 
Upon  one  occasion  a  very  distinguished  Confederate 
general,  a  kinsman  of  Major  Hairston,  was  in  the 
major's  tent,  and  was  interlarding  his  conversation 
with  'violent  and  profane  language,  unusual  in  the 
army,  and  all  the  more  remarked  upon  in  this  partic- 
ular general  on  that  account.  John  was  in  the  tent 
waiting  upon  his  master  and  his  visitor.  Seeming  at 
last  to  be  unable  to  restrain  himself,  he  interrupted 
the  general's  profanity  with  the  freedom  which  a 
trusted  negro  servant  would  sometimes  assume: 
"Look  here,  Mar's  Jube,  I  don't  cuss  myself,  Sir,  and 
I  don't  love  to  hear  no  body  else  cuss.''  I  confess  that 
I  was  interested  in  meeting  a  colored  man  who  had 
the  force  of  character  to  reprove  and  the  grace  to  do 
it  without  offence,  where  the  offender  was  so  much  his 
superior;  and  I  am  proud  to  number  him  among  my 
flock. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   131 

The  Richmond  Whig  in  March,  1808,  contained 
an  affecting  story  of  Mat,  the  negro  servant  of  Capt. 
Chalmers  Glenn,  of  North  CaroHna,  who  attended  his 
master  faithfully  during  the  campaigns  of  the  Army  of 
North  Virginia,  until  Captain  Glenn's  death  upon  the 
battlefield  of  Boonsboro,  or  South  Mountain.  Fol- 
lowing the  orders  he  had  received  from  his  master. 
Mat  buried  him  near  the  place  of  his  death,  and  re- 
turned to  his  old  home  and  to  his  widowed  mistress, 
delivering  to  her  the  messages  and  valuables  with 
which  his  master  had  intrusted  him.  But  from  the 
day  of  his  master's  death  Mat  visibly  declined, 
and  in  spite  of  the  best  medical  attention  and  the 
kindest  nursing  he  died  of  a  broken  heart,  Febru- 
ary 4,  1863,  surviving  his  master  not  quite  five 
months.^ 

Perhaps  no  better  words  can  be  found,  with  which 
to  conclude  this  consideration  of  the  Church  in  its 
relation  to  the  negro  under  the  old  system,  than  those 
of  the  Bishop  of  North  Carolina  in  1865,  when  he  set 
before  his  people  the  duties  arising  out  of  the  new 

^  Clipping  from  the  Charlotte,  N.  C,  Observer,  April  30,  1911: 
"Gastonia,  April  29.  —  An  unique  feature  of  the  annual  memorial 
day  celebration  here  Wednesday,  May  10,  will  be  a  dinner  served  by 
the  local  Chapter,  United  Daughters  of  the  Confederacy,  to  the  slaves 
who  went  with  their  masters  to  the  war,  or  who,  remaining  behind, 
did  any  service  for  the  cause  of  the  South.  There  are  a  good  many 
old  slaves  in  the  County  who  come  under  this  head,  and  this  event 
promises  to  be  one  of  unusual  interest.  Congressman  E.  Y.  Webb 
of  this  district  will  be  the  orator  of  the  day,  and  special  invitations 
will  be  mailed  within  the  next  day  or  so  to  all  the  Confederate  veterans 
in  the  County  urging  them  to  be  present." 


132  THE    CHURCH 

relation  between  the  races,  created  by  the  results  of 
the  war  which  had  just  closed. 

"I  think  it  right  to  add  a  few  words  on  another 
topic  connected  with  our  political  condition.  It  is 
on  our  duty  to  the  colored  population,  lately  liberated 
by  the  action  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 
Some  of  us  have  ever  feared,  that  the  power  and  control 
which  the  white  race  possessed  over  them  was  not 
exercised  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  us  acceptable  to 
God,  and  faithful  stewards  in  His  sight.  There  was 
much  kind  feeling  towards  our  servants,  which  was 
fully  reciprocated  by  them;  there  was  a  good  deal  of 
care  shown  in  providing  for  their  bodily  wants,  but 
very  insufficient  attention  was  paid  to  their  moral  and 
religious  improvement.  At  the  same  time,  I  take 
pleasure  in  bearing  this  testimony,  which  is,  I  think, 
very  honorable  to  the  masters  and  mistresses  under 
the  old  system,  that  they  listened  to  sharp  and  pointed 
rebukes  and  remonstrances  on  this  subject,  not  only 
with  patience  but  with  gratitude,  that  they  desired  to 
learn  their  duty,  that  they  were  year  by  year  improv- 
ing in  the  discharge  of  it,  that  one  of  the  chief  cares 
and  labors  of  a  good  many  men,  and  of  a  still  larger 
number  of  the  women,  of  the  South,  was  the  welfare 
of  their  servants,  and  that  under  the  system  of  slavery 
in  these  states  the  African  race  has  made  a  progress 
during  the  last  hundred  years,  not  only  in  numbers 
and  physical  comfort,  but  a  progress  from  barbarism 
to  civilization,  from  Heathenism  to  Christianity,  to 
which  the  history  of  the  world  offers  no  parallel.  .  .  . 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES      lf53 

This  relation,  however,  with  whatever  it  had  of  good, 
and  whatever  of  evil,  being  now  at  an  end,  but  the 
subjects  of  it  being  still  in  the  midst  of  us,  necessarily 
poor,  generally  ignorant,  and  generally  improvident, 
their  wants  and  their  dangers  must  be  very  great. 
That,  then,  which  becomes  us  towards  all  men,  espe- 
cially becomes  us  towards  them,  first  to  be  just,  then  to 
be  kind.  Let  us  remember  then  that  by  our  existing 
political  system,  in  which  we  have  acquiesced,  they 
have  a  right  to  wages  for  their  labor.  Let  us  pay 
these,  then,  not  grudgingly  as  of  necessity,  but  as  an 
honest  debt.  ...  As  Christians  we  must  see  to  it 
that  we  give  them  *that  which  is  just  and  equal, 
knowing  that  we  also  have  a  master  in  heaven.'  But 
w^e  ought  to  be  more  than  just.  That  is  but  the  Heathen 
standard  of  right.  As  Christians  we  must  aim  at 
something  higher.  We  must  remember  their  ignorance 
and  inexperience.  .  .  .  We  must  allow  for  the  im- 
mediate intoxicating  effect  of  so  great  and  sudden 
change  in  their  condition.  We  must  keep  in  mind 
their  general  faithfulness  in  the  hour  of  trial.  We  must 
allow  for  occasional  instances  of  what  seems  to  us 
folly,  or  perversity,  or  ingratitude.  We  must  practise 
towards  them  the  Apostolical  injunctions  which  are  so 
strikingly  enjoined:  *Be  pitiful,  be  courteous.'  Their 
distresses  in  their  new  condition  are  likely  to  be  many 
and  great.  Let  us  be  ready  to  relieve  them  accordingly 
as  God  gives  us  the  means.  They  are,  as  a  race, 
peculiarly  sensible  of  courtesy,  or  the  absence  of  it. 
They  show  it  abundantly  themselves,  and  they  are 


134  THE    CHURCH 

very  much  wounded  when  it  is  denied  to  them.  They 
feel  contempt  or  rudeness  more  than  a  serious  injury. 
Let  us  inflict  none  of  these  on  them.  Let  us  make 
them  feel  what  is,  I  believe,  most  true,  that  their  best 
friends  are  among  ourselves,  and  that  to  us  they  must 
look  for  counsel,  and  aid,  and  protection.  But  above 
all,  let  us  remember  that  part  of  our  duty  in  which,  I 
fear,  we  have  been  most  deficient,  providing  for  them 
sound  religious  instruction.  They  are  in  great  danger 
of  falling  into  the  hands  of  mischievous,  and  sometimes, 
no  doubt,  malevolent,  fanatics,  which  would  be  a 
great  calamity  to  them,  and  also  to  us.  Let  us  en- 
deavor to  avert  it,  by  doing  what  is  at  any  rate  our 
duty,  by  giving  them  the  true  doctrine  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  in  view  [qu:  lieu?]  of  the  vain  janglings 
of  false  teachers.  Let  us  raise  up  colored  congrega- 
tions in  our  towns,  and  let  all  our  clergy  feel  that  one 
important  part  of  their  charge  is  to  teach  and  to 
befriend  the  colored  people,  and  especially  to  train, 
as  far  as  they  are  permitted  to  do  so,  the  children  of 
that  race." 


V 

THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  CHURCH  AND  ITS  BURDENS 

It  may  fairly  be  claimed  for  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States  that  the  special  necessities  of  the 
times  met  a  not  inadequate  response  in  its  work  for 
the  soldiers  and  in  its  care  of  the  slaves.  These 
practical  activities,  however,  did  not  by  any  means 
engross  its  attention  or  absorb  all  its  energies.  There 
appears  upon  examination  abundant  evidence  of  a 
quite  remarkable  degree  of  open-mindedness  on  the 
part  of  the  Church,  even  during  these  trying  times, 
to  entertain  new  ideas,  and  of  a  disposition  to  set  its 
foot  in  some  new  paths  of  ecclesiastical  development, 
while  the  din  of  conflict  and  the  increasing  demands 
of  immediate  necessity  might  well  have  excused 
indifference  to  all  but  the  most  urgent  practical  duties. 
The  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  showed  itself 
to  be  anything  but  narrow  or  provincial  in  mind  and 
spirit.  Within  the  brief  space  of  four  years  of  strife 
and  confusion,  and  with  only  two  preliminary  con- 
ferences and  one  National  Council,  it  found  time  to 
raise,  consider,  and  enter  upon,  proposals  and  schemes 
for  advance  and  improvement,  which  we  have  not  yet, 
in  the  years  since  the  War,  been  able  fully  to  develop 
and  to  accomplish. 

We  have  seen  how  the  question  of  the  name  of  the 
135 


136  THE    CHURCH 

Church  was  raised  in  October,  1861,  in  the  adjourned 
meeting  at  Columbia,  and  how  three  Bishops,  and 
they  not  the  least  considerable  of  that  body,  had  sup- 
ported the  movement,  and  had  voted  to  substitute 
"Reformed  Catholic"  in  the  place  of  "Protestant 
Episcopal."  And  this  was  no  momentary  impulse 
of  thoughtless  minds.  Bishop  Otey  and  Bishop 
Atkinson  were  men  of  great  deliberation  of  thought 
and  weight  of  character,  who  did  not  speak  except 
upon  mature  conviction.  And  in  his  very  brief  argu- 
ment, quoted  on  a  preceding  page,  the  latter  had 
stated,  in  two  or  three  sentences,  the  substance  of 
the  reasonings  which  have  since  been  repeated  hundreds 
of  times,  with  scores  of  variations.  Bishop  Green 
was  also  a  man  who  saw  clearly  the  true  position  of 
the  Church,  and  understood  the  value  of  right  words. 
He  thus  refers  to  this  matter  in  his  Address  to  his 
Convention  of  1862:  "I  can  but  deeply  regret  that, 
in  giving  a  name  to  our  new  organization,  one  had  not 
been  chosen  expressive  of  our  Apostolic  and  Catholic 
character,  in  the  place  of  that  which  seemingly  ranks 
us  as  one  among  the  many  sects  of  which  the  last 
three  centuries  have  been  so  prolific." 

The  question  as  to  opening  the  sessions  of  the  House 
of  Bishops  was  raised  at  the  General  Council  of 
November,  1862,  by  a  motion  of  Bishop  Elliott  to  admit 
members  of  the  House  of  Deputies.  Bishop  Atkinson 
objected:  in  the  first  place,  he  said  it  would  be  im- 
practicable to  admit  one  class  of  persons  and  to  pre- 
vent the  entry  of  others;   but,  further,  he  valued  the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   137 

privacy  of  deliberation  as  tending  to  lessen  heat  and 
acrimony  in  debate:  "In  private  session  many  remarks 
could  be  passed  over  in  silence,  which,  if  publicly  made, 
must  be  matter  of  reply."  Bishop  Davis  said  he  had 
at  one  time  great  reverence  for  the  House  of  Bishops; 
experience  had  sorely  diminished  this.  "Why  attempt 
to  create  a  fictitious  reverence?  Let  us  be  real." 
But  he  opposed  the  change,  because  he  thought  that 
the  private  session  lessened  the  influence  of  outside 
popular  prejudice  upon  the  Bishops.  Bishop  Green 
and  Bishop  Lay  were  of  the  same  mind;  and  Bishop 
Wilmer  suggested  the  absence  of  several  of  the  Bishops 
as  an  argument  against  the  proposed  change;  so 
Bishop  Elliott  withdrew  his  resolution.  There  is  no 
note  of  this  matter  in  the  published  minutes  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  House  of  Bishops.  The  foregoing 
account  is  taken  from  MS.  memoranda  made  at  the 
time  by  Bishop  Lay. 

We  have  seen  how  the  committee,  which  reported 
the  proposed  Constitution,  suggested  for  adoption  a 
scheme  of  a  Provincial  System  which  would  have 
made  real  Provinces.  The  modification  of  that  scheme, 
which  was  adopted,  was  as  much  of  an  advance  towards 
the  Provincial  System  as  the  Church  in  the  United 
States  was  able  to  accomplish  in  the  forty  years  follow- 
ing, up  to  1904.  The  plan  of  Judicial  and  Missionary 
Departments,  adopted  in  1904,  is  a  slight  gain  in  the 
direction  of  eventual  Provincial  organization. 

Bearing  on  this  matter  of  organization  was  the 
canon  brought  forward  in  the  Alabama  Convention 


138  THE    CHURCH 

of  1861,  the  Convention  which  declared  the  Diocese 
of  Alabama  to  be  separated  from  the  Church  in  the 
United  States.  This  proposed  Canon  adopted  as  a 
principle,  and  advocated  as  the  true  policy  of  diocesan 
organization,  the  primitive  idea  of  the  see  city,  and 
provided  that,  as  soon  as  practicable,  three  sees  should 
be  formed  out  of  the  Diocese  of  Alabama,  in  the  cities 
of  Mobile,  INlontgomery,  and  Huntsville.  The  pro- 
posed canon  was  not  adopted,  but  it  was  characteristic 
of  the  times.  All  through  the  South  there  was  a 
disposition  to  seek  for  some  more  effective  form  of 
organization  than  the  "State  Diocese,"  and  for  the 
first  year  or  two  the  young  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States  heard  a  great  deal  of  learned  talk  about  the 
wonderful  growth  and  prosperity  to  follow  upon  a 
reorganization  of  the  Dioceses  after  a  more  truly 
primitive  model.  The  various  schemes  suggested 
and  discussed  all  came  to  nothing  in  the  increasing 
pressure  of  deadly  peril  and  necessity,  and  it  is  use- 
less to  enquire  into  their  details.  They  do  serve, 
however,  to  show  that  the  Church  was  not  intellect- 
ually stagnant,  nor  blindly  content  with  its  accus- 
tomed routine,  but  was  earnestly  endeavoring  to 
adapt  itself  to  the  varying  and  urgent  needs  of  the 
time. 

In  other  directions  a  beginning  was  made  in  impor- 
tant matters,  which  have  since  been  taken  up  by  the 
Church  in  the  United  States,  and  carried  through  to 
completion.  Mention  has  been  made  of  the  Committee, 
appointed  in  November,  1862,  on  the  Bible  and  Prayer 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   139 

Book.  This  Committee  was  made  up  as  follows: 
Bishops  Elliott,  Green,  and  Lay;  the  Rev.  Drs. 
Sparrow  of  Virginia,  and  Mason  of  North  Carolina, 
the  Rev.  Paul  Trapier  of  South  Carolina,  Judge  Phelan 
of  Alabama,  Judge  Battle  of  North  Carolina,  and  Mr. 
Edward  McCrady  of  South  Carolina.  It  was  charged 
with  the  duty  of  printing  the  Prayer  Book,  and  prepar- 
ing a  compendium  for  public  worship,  taken  from  the 
Prayer  Book,  for  the  use  of  the  army,  as  has  already 
been  mentioned.  But  this  committee  was  also 
authorized  to  take  up  the  question  of  Prayer  Book 
revision,  and  to  report  to  the  next  meeting  of  the 
General  Council  such  changes  in  the  Prayer  Book, 
not  affecting  doctrine  or  discipline,  as  might  seem 
desirable.  It  had  been  moved  in  the  House  of  Deputies 
that  to  the  words  "doctrine  and  discipline"  should 
be  added  the  word  "worship,"  thus  limiting  the  scope 
of  their  work  to  mere  trifling  matters  of  unimportant 
detail.  This  amendment,  however,  had  been  rejected, 
and  the  Committee  was  left  at  liberty  in  regard  to 
all  matters  purely  liturgical;  so  that  they  might  have 
considered  and  reported  such  a  revision  as  we  have 
since  seen  actually  accomplished  in  our  General  Con- 
vention of  1892.  Such  a  revision  could  have  been 
made  under  the  terms  of  the  resolution  appointing 
this  Committee.  But  there  was  probably  no  distinct 
purpose,  or  even  serious  thought,  of  making  any  im- 
portant changes  at  that  time.  Nothing  of  the  kind 
was  proposed  or  spoken  of,  so  far  as  we  know,  in  the 
Council  or  in  outside  discussion.     Indeed,  the  Council 


l^O  THE    CHURCH 

SO  emphasized  the  fact  that  no  alterations  had  been 
made  in  the  Prayer  Book,  except  the  change  of  two 
words,  and  those  words  such  as  had  no  essential  doc- 
trinal or  liturgical  significance,  that  we  cannot  avoid 
the  conclusion  that  any  proposition  for  real  revision, 
however  manifestly  in  the  line  of  improvement,  would 
have  been  all  but  unanimously  rejected.  At  the  same 
time  the  wisdom,  which  in  so  many  ways  shines  out  in 
the  proceedings  of  that  Council,  w^as  not  wanting  here. 
The  w^iser  heads  in  that  assembly  knew  that  no  forms 
of  worship  can  for  three  hundred  years  express  the 
devotions  of  a  living  Church,  without,  at  the  end  of 
such  a  period,  requiring  some  revision,  and  the  admis- 
sion of  new  forms  and  services,  for  the  expression  and 
cultivation  of  the  spiritual  life  of  the  people.  They 
therefore  wisely  introduced,  at  this  critical  time,  the 
thought  of  amendments  even  to  their  precious  Prayer 
Book,  that,  becoming  accustomed  to  the  prospect  of 
needed  changes,  the  mind  of  the  Church  might  be 
adjusting  itself  to  the  thought,  and  thereby  be  the 
better  prepared  to  undertake  the  work  when  the 
fitting  season  should  have  come.  We  have  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  the  Committee  entered  upon  the 
serious  consideration  of  any  alterations  in  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer. 

The  only^  suggestion  of    any  important  alteration 

^  In  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  South  Carohna  it  was  pro- 
posed, in  1863,  to  add  the  words  "Governor  of  this  State"  after  "Presi- 
dent of  the  Confederate  States"  in  the  Prayer  for  those  in  Civil 
Authority. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   141 

at  this  time  came  from  the  Diocese  of  Ahibama,  and 
is  significant  of  the  times.  Tlie  special  trials  which 
Alabama  and  its  Bishop  had  to  endure  at  the  end  of 
the  War  will  be  mentioned  hereafter.  Bishoj)  Wilmer, 
in  his  Convention  Address  of  18G4,  ''with  something  of 
prophetic  ken,"  advocated  a  change  in  the  Prayer  for 
those  in  Civil  Authority.  He  says:  "I  have  long 
entertained  the  opinion,  and  on  suitable  occasions 
have  expressed  it,  that  the  regular  and  ordinary  forms 
of  public  worship  should  be  so  entirely  catholic  in 
character,  as  to  be  adapted  to  all  the  exigencies  of 
time,  place,  and  circumstance.  It  seems  to  me  most 
undesirable  and  unnecessary,  to  say  the  least,  that 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  should  undergo  a  revision 
and  reprint  upon  the  occasion  of  every  political  revolu- 
tion. The  phraseology  of  the  prayer  for  our  Rulers, 
now  in  use,  has  given  needless  occasion  of  offence, 
even  in  time  of  high  party  excitement.  The  preface 
to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  declares,  that,  'in 
the  prayers  for  our  civil  rulers,  the  principal  care  was, 
to  make  them  conformable  to  what  ought  to  be  the 
proper  end  of  all  such  prayers,  namely,  that  Rulers 
may  have  grace,  wisdom,  and  understanding,  to  execute 
justice  and  to  maintain  truth,  and  that  the  people  may 
lead  quiet  and  peaceable  lives,  in  all  godliness  and 
honesty,'  —  a  phraseology,  in  my  judgment,  at  once 
ample,  minute  and  catholic.  If  such  a  form  of  prayer 
were  introduced  into  the  Service,  it  would  always  be 
appropriate,  and  we  should  be  spared  the  necessity  of 
changing  our  worship  with  every  change  in  the  political 


142  THE    CHURCH 

world  around  us.  Should  this  Council  entertain  the 
same  opinions  with  myself,  it  would  be  competent 
for  us  to  instruct  our  delegates  to  the  next  General 
Council  to  propose  and  vote  for  such  a  change  as  I 
have  proposed." 

The  Diocesan  Council  of  Alabama  took  up  the 
subject  thus  suggested  by  the  Bishop,  and  passed  a 
resolution  approving  of  the  proposed  change  in  the 
prayer;  but  declared  that  it  was  not  expedient  at  that 
time  to  instruct  their  delegates  on  the  subject. 

Though  no  movement  was  made  towards  immediate 
revision  of  the  Prayer  Book,  the  Committee  do  seem 
to  have  considered  the  revision  and  improvement  of 
the  Hymnody  and  Psalmody  of  the  Church.  We 
learn  from  a  notice  published  in  The  Church  Intelli- 
gencer of  October  5,  1864,  and  signed  by  the  Rev. 
Thomas  F.  Davis,  Jr.,  a  son  of  Bishop  Davis,  probably 
acting  as  secretary  of  the  Committee,  that  Bishop  Lay 
had  been  requested  to  make  a  report  to  a  meeting  of 
the  Committee,  appointed  for  December  following,  on 
the  "Hymnology"  of  the  Church,  and  that  to  that 
end  he  desired  to  receive,  from  all  persons  interested, 
suggestions,  criticisms,  and  information,  such  as  might 
in  any  manner  assist  him  in  the  proper  fulfilment  of 
the  duty  assigned  to  him.  From  the  same  source  we 
learn  also  that  Bishop  Green  was  chairman  of  a  like 
**  sub-committee  having  charge  of  our  peculiar  Psal- 
mology,"  and  that  he  was  desirous  of  obtaining,  for 
the  use  of  his  sub-committee,  copies  of  "paraphrases 
and  metrical  versions  of  the  Psalms,  specially  those  of 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   143 

Chas.  Wesley,  Lyte,  Bishop    Mant,  and    Archdeacon 
Churtoii." 

Ill  the  event  it  proved  that  no  sufficient  time  or 
leisure  was  allowed  for  the  development  and  accom- 
plishment of  those  schemes  for  improving  the  worship 
of  the  Church,  or  for  its  better  adaptation  to  changing 
conditions  and  necessities.  But  it  is  interesting  to 
observe  how,  in  several  matters,  and  those  of  no  slight 
moment,  these  schemes  and  efforts  anticipated  the 
action  of  the  reunited  Church  in  the  years  which  have 
elapsed  since  the  close  of  the  War.  And  perhaps  they 
are  even  more  interesting  and  important  as  showing 
how  the  Church  in  the  South  kept  a  true  sense  of  pro- 
portion in  her  life  and  work,  and  was  by  divine  grace 
enabled  to  preserve  the  spirit  of  love  and  devotion. 
The  din  of  war  did  not  dull  her  ears  to  the  heavenly 
harmonies  of  prayer  and  praise.  It  is  a  noble  sight  to 
look  upon  —  Bishop  Green,  with  his  Diocese  desolated 
by  war,  overrun  by  contending  armies,  and  his  own 
delicate  frame  taxed  beyond  endurance  by  incessant 
pastoral  labors;  and  Bishop  Lay,  driven  from  his 
Diocese,  and  once  and  again  arrested  and  imprisoned, 
not  even  upon  a  false  charge,  but  confessedly  upon 
no  charge  at  all  of  misdoing,  but  simply  as  means  of 
terrifying  others,  —  to  see  these  two  saintly  men, 
amid  these  sad  and  distracting  surroundings,  setting 
themselves  to  study  with  renewed  care  and  diligence 
the  Psalms  of  David  and  the  great  hymns  of  the 
Christian  Church,  that  thereby  they  might  help  God's 
people    to    a    nearer    sense    of    His    presence    and 


144  THE    CHURCH 

power,  and  a  deeper  trust  in  His  love  and  goodness. 
It  is  like  Paul  and  Silas  praying  and  singing  praises 
to  God  out  of  the  darkness  of  their  Philippian 
prison ! 

But  the  work  of  Bishops  and  of  Councils,  and  even 
the  faithful  ministrations  of  the  Church  to  the  soldiers, 
and  its  anxious  care  and  labor  for  the  spiritual  welfare 
of  the  slaves,  were  only  a  small  part  of  its  life  and 
work  during  those  four  years  of  heroic  struggle.  The 
greatest  and  best  things  in  life  can  never  be  adequately 
preserved  and  portrayed.  They  can  only  be  experi- 
enced and,  perhaps,  remembered.  The  burden  and 
diflficulty  of  maintaining  the  ordinary  routine  work 
of  the  Church  in  the  South  were  greatly  increased, 
and  too  often  that  work  was  wholly  destroyed  in  its 
visible  aspect,  by  the  War.  In  the  first  months  of 
the  opening  conflict  the  violence  of  political  and 
sectional  feeling,  and  the  fierceness  of  the  martial 
spirit,  produced  a  state  of  popular  feeling  adverse 
to  religious  sentiment  and  unresponsive  to  religious 
appeals.  The  urgency  of  the  temporal  necessity,  and 
the  appeal  to  physical  force,  weakened  the  moral  sense 
and  dulled  the  apprehension  of  spiritual  truth.  Bishop 
Gregg,  in  his  Pastoral  Letter  of  December  27,  1861, 
thus  refers  to  the  secularizing  influence  of  absorbing 
political  interests:  ''Things  present  and  things  to 
come  are  equally  unavailing  to  stem  the  tide.  The 
Christian's  heart  is  taken  captive,  his  love  for  Christ 
grows  cold,  prayer  dies  away,  religious  zeal  abates, 
spiritual  realities  cease  to  affect  him,  and  lukewarm- 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   145 

ness  is  the  present  effect,  as  spiritual  death  may  be 
the  final  result."  Bishop  Otey's  words  of  like  import 
have  already  been  quoted. 

This  condition  of  the  public  mind,  however,  soon 
passed  away  with  the  increasing  experience  of  the 
tremendous  character  of  the  conflict,  and  of  its  de- 
mands upon  the  courage  and  patience  of  the  people. 
The  ministrations  of  the  Church,  when  the  South  had 
settled  down  to  the  real  strain  of  the  struggle,  were 
more  effective  and  more  fully  appreciated  than  ever 
before.  For  example,  we  read  in  a  news-item  in  the 
Church  Intelligencer  of  September  14,  1864,  referring 
to  the  Journal  of  the  Diocesan  Convention  of  Georgia: 
"Under  the  blessing  of  God  the  progress  of  the  Church 
has  been  wonderful,  and  the  liberality  of  the  people 
without  stint.  In  the  Bishop's  visitations  every  where 
he  seems  to  have  been  received  into  communities  where 
the  Church  is  hardly  known,  with  open  arms.  Places 
suitable  for  service  were  provided,  children  and  adults 
baptized,  and  numbers  confirmed.  But  a  few  years 
ago,  Georgia  seemed  a  cold  and  barren  soil  for  the 
plantation  and  growth  of  the  Church.  Now  it  appears 
that  the  seed  sow^n  after  all  was  not  on  unpropitious 
soil."  AYhile  in  many  sections  the  ministrations  of 
the  Church  were  thus  increasingly  effective,  large 
areas  of  country  and  large  numbers  of  the  population 
came,  in  one  way  and  another,  as  the  War  went  on, 
to  be  cut  off  and  rendered  inaccessible.  The  occupa- 
tion of  parts  of  the  country  by  hostile  forces,  the 
passing  and  repassing  of  contending  armies,  the 
11 


146  THE    CHURCH 

absence  of  almost  the  entire  white  male  population  in 
the  army,  and  the  consequent  removal  of  their  families 
from  such  regions  as  were  exposed  to  the  occupation, 
or  the  devastating  raids  of  the  enemy,  so  depopulated 
the  country,  or  so  weakened  and  demoralized  its 
diminished  population,  that  parishes  were  broken  up, 
the  clergy  left  without  support,  and  the  ministrations 
of  the  Church  in  too  many  cases  wholly  abandoned. 
Often  the  clergyman,  whose  flock  was  thus  scattered 
and  his  work  destroyed,  had  an  unprotected  family, 
whom  he  could  not  leave,  to  take  a  chaplaincy  in  the 
army  at  a  stipend  insuflScient  even  for  his  own  expenses, 
nor,  in  the  general  interruption  of  communications, 
could  he  find  another  parish,  in  the  impoverished  con- 
dition of  the  country,  able  to  afford  a  refuge  and  main- 
tenance for  his  wife  and  children.  Bishop  Davis 
refers  to  such  conditions  as  existing  to  a  considerable 
extent  in  the  rich  and  populous  coast  counties  of  his 
Diocese,  where  the  Church  had  been  strongest  and  most 
amply  supplied,  but  which  now  were  either  occupied 
by  the  enemy,  or  exposed  to  constant  apprehensions 
of  danger,  from  the  fleets  of  the  United  States,  never 
long  absent  from  that  coast.  Bishop  Green  says  in 
his  Convention  Address  of  1863,  before  Mississippi  had 
come  to  its  worst  experiences  of  war,  that  of  his  thirty- 
seven  clergymen  '*not  more  than  two  thirds  of  them 
are  actively  and  efliciently  engaged  in  parochial  labor.'* 
Where  these  unfavorable  conditions  did  not  prevail, 
those  clergymen  who  were  not  possessed  of  some 
private  fortune  began,  after  the  first  year  of  the  War, 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   147 

to  endure  a  heavy  burden  of  anxiety  and  of  diffirulty 
in  providing  even  the  most  meagre  support  for  their 
famihes.  The  cost  of  living  went  up  so  rapidly,  by 
the  double  influence  of  a  diminishing  supply  and  a 
depreciating  currency,  that  the  most  ample  salary, 
promised  at  the  beginning  of  the  year,  proved  wholly 
insuflScient  long  before  it  had  been  paid.  It  is  a  curious 
experience,  of  all  such  times  of  financial  disorder  and 
a  fluctuating  currency,  that  men's  ideas  have  become 
so  fixed  upon  names  and  the  mere  denominations  of 
money,  that  it  is  difficult  for  them  to  remember,  so  as 
truly  to  realize,  the  fact  that  money  is  merely  a  medium 
of  exchange,  and  has  a  relative  value  only  —  is  worth 
only  what  it  will  purchase.  A  dollar  somehow  seems 
really  to  be  a  dollar,  and  to  have  an  intrinsic  worth, 
w^hen  it  has  long  ceased  to  command  in  exchange  that 
which  gave  it  value.  In  the  worst  times  of  depreciated 
Confederate  money  five  thousand  dollars,  to  the  mind 
of  the  man  not  in  business  and  not  accustomed  to 
frequent  financial  transaction,  seemed  a  very  large 
salary;  so  large  in  fact  that  very  few  clergymen, 
except  those  having  the  chief  parishes  in  the  very  few 
large  Southern  cities,  ever  received  so  much;  yet 
that  sum,  after  the  first  two  years  of  the  War,  was 
wholly  inadequate  for  the  most  frugal  support  of  the 
average  family.  Even  a  rich  congregation  could 
with  difficulty  keep  the  salary  of  the  rector  up  to  his 
living  expenses,  for  it  was  impossible  to  estimate 
expenses  even  three  months  ahead.  Happy  was  that 
rector  who  had    among   his   parishioners   prosperous 


148  THECHURCH 

planters  and  farmers  who  could  make  their  contribu- 
tions towards  his  support  in  corn  and  wood,  pork 
and  potatoes. 

In  September,  1864,  the  Richmond  Sentinel y  in  a 
striking  editorial  article,  propounded  the  question: 
''How  can  Pastors  live?''  It  then  proceeded  to  give 
some  figures  in  elucidation  of  the  question  it  had 
raised,  taking  as  a  basis  for  calculation  a  family  of 
six  persons,  man  and  wife,  two  children,  and  two 
servants;  and  allowing  the  meagre  half -ration  served 
out  to  the  Confederate  soldier  as  the  measure  of  the 
necessary  food  supply.     This  is  the  calculation  given: 

400  lbs.  bacon  at  $     5    $2000 

4  bbls.  flour  "     150    600 

20  bush,  corn  meal  "      20    400 

32  loads  of  wood  "       25    800 

20  lbs.  lard  "        5    100 

10  lbs.  tallow,  for  lights  "        5    50 

6  pairs  of  shoes    350 

House  Rent 400 

Hire  of  two  servants   250 

Taxes,  and  Salt  —  say  —     50 

5000 

The  writer  states  that  the  prices  given  above  are  lower 
than  the  prices  then  prevailing  in  some  parts  of  the 
country;  and  it  will  be  noticed  that  nothing  is  allowed 
for  milk,  butter,  eggs,  sugar,  molasses,  fresh  meats, 
vegetables,  fruit,  or  poultry;  and  that  one  pair  of 
shoes  for  each  member  of  the  family  is  all  that  this 
estimate  allows  in  the  way  of  clothing.  The  editor 
very  pertinently  proceeds:    "Can  any  reasonable  man 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   149 

think  such  a  question  out  of  place  in  a  secuhir  journal? 
No  men  render  the  country  more  important  service 
at  all  times;  and  during  this  fearful  struggle,  who 
have  so  powerfully  upheld  everything  that  was  good? 
How  unrequited  their  services  have  commonly  been, 
is  better  known  than  practically  regarded.  Does  it 
not,  then,  become  every  good  patriot  —  saying  nothing 
of  the  Christian  —  to  take  up  this  question  now  in  its 
proper  bearing,  —  'How  can  your  Pastor  live?'" 

As  one  answer  to  his  question  the  editor  states  that 
the  members  of  the  Second  Presbyterian  Church,  of 
Richmond,  had  just  presented  to  their  pastor,  the 
eminent  and  beloved  Dr.  Moses  D.  Hoge,  the  sum  of 
twelve  thousand  dollars  in  addition  to  his  regular 
salary.  We  learn  from  another  source  that,  much 
about  this  same  time,  "certain  laymen  of  the  Diocese 
of  South  Carolina  have  presented  Bishop  Davis  with 
a  purse  of  ten  thousand  dollars,  to  provide  better  for 
his  comfort  in  these  times  of  cheap  money  and  dear 
living."  The  Diocesan  Convention  of  Alabama,  this 
same  year  1864,  passed  a  resolution:  *'That  in  con- 
sideration of  the  advanced  prices  of  living,  the  parishes 
be  invited  to  make  voluntary  contributions  to  the  sup- 
port of  the  Bishop,  and  forward  the  same  to  him, 
when  practicable,  in  such  manner  as  they  shall  deem 
most  expedient."  The  want  and  suffering  which 
must  have  been  endured  by  many  of  the  clergy  and 
their  families  in  small  and  obscure  parishes  could 
hardly  be  more  forcibly  suggested  to  the  judicious 
mind  than  by  these   extraordinary  methods   adopted 


150  THE    CHURCH 

in  the  case  of  those  most  favorably  situated  and  least 
exposed  to  want.^ 

Upon  his  Diocesan  Convention  of  May  5,  1864,  the 
Bishop  of  Alabama  urged  the  imperative  duty  of 
establishing  Homes  for  the  widows  and  orphaned 
children  of  the  State.  The  Convention  endorsed  the 
suggestion,  and  requested  the  Bishop  to  take  upon 
himself  the  authority  of  establishing  such  Homes. 
It  was  proposed  to  have,  not  one  great  institution, 
but  a  number  of  small  Homes  in  different  parts  of  the 
Diocese.  In  The  Church  Intelligencer  of  December  7, 
1864,  Bishop  Wilmer  published  a  statement  of  his 
plans  and  purposes,  and  claimed  the  support  of  his 
people.  The  Diocese  of  Alabama  through  its  Bishop 
had  established  an  order  of  Deaconesses  under  whom 
this  extensive  work  was  to  be  carried  on.  These  good 
women,  devoting  themselves  to  works  of  piety  and 
charity,  were  divided  into  three  classes.  Deaconesses 
and  Associates,  who  were  to  reside  in  one  or  other  of 
the  permanent  Chapter  Houses,  and  Probationers, 
who  were  not  required  to  do  so.  They  were  all  to 
serve  without  fee  or  reward,  receiving  only  their 
necessary  support  from  the  order,  and  anything  given 
them  was  to  go  into  a  common  fund.     "From  these 

^  Bishop  Gregg,  in  his  Convention  Address  in  ISGi,  expresses  his 
gratitude  to  his  people  for  voluntary  contributions  made  to  his  sup- 
port in  addition  to  his  salary. 

The  following  entry  is  copied  from  Bishop  Lay's  MS.  Journal: 
"  Arkadelphia,  Arkansas,  May  3,  1863. 

"  Preached  on  the  text,  '  Is  it  a  time  to  receive  money  ? '  A  pair  of 
boots,  a  barrel  of  sugar,  and  $290  given  me  here." 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES   151 

several  classes  persons  will  be  detailed  to  act  as  matrons 
and  assistants  in  Church  Homes;  as  nurses  in  Hospi- 
tals; as  teachers;  and  to  serve  in  any  capacity  or 
place,  where  it  may  be  thought  advisable  or  necessary." 
This  very  extensive  and  admirable  scheme  was  car- 
ried out  only  partially.  The  collapse  of  1865  checked 
it  almost  in  its  birth;  but  the  order  of  Deaconesses 
remains  one  of  the  institutions  of  the  Diocese. 

The  trials  of  those  days  were  not  without  blessed 
results  in  the  lives  of  both  clergy  and  people,  "who  were 
exercised  thereby."  Common  struggle,  common  suffer- 
ing, and  common  poverty  bore  sweet  fruits  of  mutual 
sympathy,  helpfulness,  and  love;  and  never  was  there 
a  fuller  and  freer  hospitality,  a  more  generous  response 
to  the  necessity  of  friend  and  neighbor,  and  of  the 
stranger,  especially  if  he  were  a  soldier,  whom  chance 
or  the  fortune  of  war  brought  to  the  door.  The  tradi- 
tions of  the  War  are  cherished  in  the  South,  not  merely  in 
honor  of  our  noble  dead,  but  because  of  their  many  precious 
and  helpful  memories  of  mutual  kindness,  sympathy,  and 
affection,  growing  out  of  the  common  trials  and  tribula- 
tions of  those  strenuous  days.  There  was  war  without, 
but  there  was  peace  and  good-will  within  our  borders. 

And  there  was  no  secularizing  of  the  Church  or  of 
the  clergy.  It  is  true  that  a  few  clergj^men  entered 
the  army,  as  Bishop  Polk,  and  the  Rev.  William  N. 
Pendleton,  who  served  with  distinction  as  colonel,  and 
chief  of  artillery,  and  rose  to  the  rank  of  brigadier 
general.  But  the  common  mind  and  heart  of  the 
Church  were  not  affected  by  these  exceptional  cases. 


152  THE    CHURCH 

Bishop  Polk's  known  deeply  religious  character,  his 
high-minded  yet  simple-hearted  devotion  and  spiritu- 
ality, manifest  to  all  who  came  in  contact  with  him, 
the  burden  which  lay  upon  his  heart,  and  his  undoubted 
sincerity  in  desiring  to  be  released  from  the  obligations 
of  military  service,  seemed  to  set  his  case  apart,  and 
to  emphasize  its  wholly  exceptional  character.  And 
there  were  not  wanting  those  who,  seeing  the  wonderful 
religious  influence  exerted  by  him  in  the  army,  and 
especially  among  the  highest  officers  who  were  in  any 
way  associated  with  him,  felt  that  his  military  service 
had  been  providentially  blessed,  and  used  in  the  work 
of  extending  the  Kingdom  of  Christ. 

The  clergy  throughout  the  South  were  enthusiasti- 
cally loyal  to  the  cause  of  the  Confederacy,  and  none 
more  so  than  those  who  had  come  from  the  North,  as 
many  of  our  most  distinguished  clergymen  had  come. 
But,  though  loyal  in  heart  and  mind  to  the  Southern 
cause,  they  were  seldom  guilty  of  forgetting  their  duty 
as  ministers  of  Christ.  They  stood  in  their  place;  they 
ministered  about  holy  things;  and  they  realized  their 
function  in  binding  up  the  wounds  and  allaying  the 
fever  of  strife.  The  note  sounded  out  in  the  heated 
days  of  1861,  that  political  preaching  must  be  eschewed, 
and  that  the  clergy  must  give  a  spiritual  application 
to  secular  events,  and  so  keep  themselves  within  their 
proper  sphere  —  that  continued  to  be  the  note  which 
the  Church  gave  out  through  all  the  long  months  and 
years  of  strife.  Thus  in  May,  1863,  the  Committee 
on  the  State  of  the  Church  in  the  Virginia  Diocesan 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES       1.53 

Council:  "To  our  ministers,  especially  in  this  crisis, 
we  would  say  —  What  is  wanted  is  not  sermons  on 
the  times  and  the  war  and  the  objects  of  our  country's 
hopes.  We  need  not  preach  to  the  soldiers  about 
war  and  camp  and  battles;  they  hear  and  think 
enough  of  that  without  our  help.  What  they  want 
and  expect  of  us  as  ministers  of  Christ,  is  just  the  glad 
tidings  of  salvation,  just  the  eternal  message  of  grace 
and  love  to  perishing  sinners."  Those  whose  memory 
retains  the  impression  made  by  the  pastoral  ministra- 
tions of  those  days  can  never  forget  with  what  power 
the  appeal  of  the  Gospel  message,  in  the  ordinary 
services  of  the  Church,  was  emphasized  by  the  great 
experiences,  the  victories,  the  defeats,  the  sufferings 
and  bereavements,  of  the  time.  In  all  the  special 
prayers  put  forth  by  the  Bishops  there  was  a  note  of 
humility  and  penitence.  I  do  not  remember  a  phrase 
of  offensive  hostility  in  reference  to  the  public  enemy, 
more  than  a  petition  that  the  plans  of  the  invader  might 
be  confounded,  and  that  he  might  be  repelled  from  our 
borders,  or  some  equivalent  expression.  And  what  a 
solemn  warning  the  words  of  the  old  prophet  seemed  to 
have  for  us  in  the  fast-day  text  of  the  preacher,  when 
he  spoke  to  us  from  these,  or  such  like,  words:  "For 
all  this  His  anger  is  not  turned  away,  but  His  hand  is 
stretched  out  still!" 

The  Southern  Bishops,  in  their  Pastorals  and  Con- 
vention addresses,  did  not  fail  to  warn  their  people 
against  the  temptation  to  entertain  feelings  of  malice 
and  hatred  against  the  enemies  and  invaders  of  their 


154  THE    CHURCH 

country.  The  Bishop  of  Mississippi  was  a  man  of 
tender  sensibiHties,  and  of  an  emotional  temperament, 
whose  feeUngs  were  not  kept  under  restraint  by  that 
massive  and  masterful  quality  of  character,  which  in 
such  a  man  as  Bishop  Atkinson,  for  example,  seemed 
to  make  any  ebuUition  of  feeling  or  of  temper  all  but 
impossible  to  imagine.  And  Bishop  Green's  Conven- 
tion addresses  show  many  evidences  of  the  keenness  of 
the  pain  he  endured  in  speaking  of  the  experiences  of 
his  pastoral  work.  It  is,  on  that  account,  all  the  more 
impressive  to  read  his  words  to  his  Convention  of  1861 : 
*'Let  us  not,  in  the  fervor  of  our  patriotism,  forget  that 
we  are  Christian  men,  and  yield  to  feelings  of  hatred 
and  revenge,  m^ore  than  a  true  love  of  country  calls  for 
at  our  hands.  .  .  .  Dreadful  as  is  the  spirit  of  this 
unnatural  struggle,  it  may  yet  be  driven  out  by  prayer 
and  fasting.  .  .  .  Let  us  suppress  all  bitterness  and 
wrath  towards  others,  and  all  envyings  and  jealousies 
among  ourselves."  And  again  in  1863,  after  a  pathetic 
account  of  the  ruin,  desolation,  spoliation,  and  desti- 
tution of  the  people,  with  the  frustration  of  all  good 
works,  in  certain  parts  of  his  Diocese,  he  hastens  to 
add:  "Let  us  also  take  heed,  beloved  brethren,  how 
we  suffer  these  unjustifiable  acts  of  our  enemy  to 
betray  us  into  a  spirit  of  revenge  and  indiscriminate 
reprobation  of  a  people  so  lately  united  to  us  in  fra- 
ternal bonds,  and  among  whom  there  are  at  this  mo- 
ment no  doubt  thousands  who  feel  for  us  a  sympathy 
they  dare  not  express."  Another  interesting  passage 
in  Bishop  Green's  Lenten  Pastoral,  dated  February  22, 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   155 

1862,  anticipates  the  comparatively  recent  recommen- 
dation of  one  of  our  Missionary  Councils  in  regard  to 
the  general  observance  of  the  noontide  prayer.  He 
says:  "Let  each  minister  of  God  open  his  church 
daily,  and  use  the  Litany,  together  with  such  of  our 
Collects  and  Prayers  as  our  most  pressing  wants  re- 
quire. And  let  those  who  may  be  providentially 
hindered  from  thus  making  their  common  sup{)lications 
before  God,  seek  Him  in  the  retired  chambers  of  their 
dwellings.  And,  that  our  petitions  may  go  up  unitedly 
before  Him,  let  me  further  recommend  that  the  Hour 
OF  TWELVE  each  day  be  observed  for  that  purpose, 
until  Peace  be  restored  to  our  borders.  When  God 
shall  thus  see  a  people  on  their  knees,  He  will  not  be 
long  in  hearing  their  cry." 

Little  as  our  people  in  general  may  have  been  able 
to  attain  to  this  benign  and  patient  spirit,  in  the  fierce 
hurry  and  strain  of  the  deepening  conflict,  they  w^ere 
proud  of  their  saintly  Bishops,  and  loved  and  respected 
them  all  the  more,  because  they  thus  warned  them, 
and  set  before  them  their  sins. 

Not  that  the  Southern  Bishops  and  clergy,  more 
than  other  men,  were  perfect,  or  wholly  superior  to 
the  human  feelings  naturally  engendered  by  the  ex- 
periences through  which  they  were  passing.  Now 
and  again  natural  feeling  breaks  out,  and  sectional  or 
party  prejudice  may  color  a  sermon  or  a  prayer.  The 
eloquent  Bishop  of  Georgia  was  at  times  moved  to  set 
before  his  people  the  grounds  upon  which  the  South 
had  separated  from  the  North;  or  in  his  pathetic  and 


156  THE    CHURCH 

indignant  outburst  of  feeling,  in  his  funeral  oration 
over  the  dead  body  of  his  friend  and  brother,  the 
Bishop  of  Louisiana,  he  might  seem  to  forget  the  self- 
restraint  of  the  Christian  philosopher  in  the  fiery  ardor 
of  the  patriot  and  the  loving  sorrow  of  the  friend;  as 
did  others  of  lesser  note  upon  less  provocation.  But 
such  cases  were  exceptional,  and  served  but  to  empha- 
size the  general  tone  of  humility,  reverence,  and  godly 
sincerity,  in  which  the  clergy  of  the  Church  called 
upon  their  people  to  repent  of  their  sins,  both  personal 
and  public,  and  to  see  in  the  sufferings  and  bereave- 
ments of  the  hour  wholesome  disciplines  and  correc- 
tions for  their  profit,  and  for  the  ultimate  good  of  their 
country. 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  Church 
or  the  clergy  pleased  themselves  with  any  complacent 
dreams  of  their  own  goodness.  The  deep  sense  of 
unworthiness,  characteristic  of  the  religious  feeling  of 
the  time,  is  the  chief  evidence  of  a  real  power  working 
in  the  mind  and  heart;  and  both  in  sermons  and  in 
the  religious  press  are  found  constant  warnings  against 
the  dangers  and  increasing  evils  of  the  hour.  But  it 
is  noticeable  that  while  vice  and  intemperance  and 
profanity  and  malice  are  rebuked,  there  is  no  assertion, 
or  other  evidence,  that  these  sins  were  increasing. 
On  the  contrary,  from  time  to  time  appear  evidences 
and  testimonies,  both  direct  and  incidental,  that  in 
those  particulars  there  was  a  manifest  improvement 
general  throughout  the  country,  and  especially  among 
the  soldiers.     The  sins  complained  of,  and  the  chief 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   157 

objects  of  attack  by  preax^hers  and  religious  writers, 
were  the  sins  of  greed,  covetousness,  extortion,  and 
disregard  of  the  sanctity  of  the  Lord's  Day.  In  the 
last  case  the  complaint  was  mainly  directed  against 
the  Confederate  government  for  violating  the  Sunday 
rest  in  connection  with  the  public  business.  Bishops 
preached  against  speculation  in  the  necessaries  of  life, 
against  extortion,  and  against  the  inordinate  thirst 
for  riches,  manifest  in  such  practices.  Certainly  such 
sins  needed  to  be  preached  against;  yet  it  is  quite 
certain  also  that  it  was  the  unavoidable  conditions  of 
war,  and  scarcity,  and  a  depreciating  currency,  which 
were  the  real  evils.  The  apparent  increase  in  the 
practices  complained  of  was  an  unavoidable  incident 
of  those  conditions,  and  did  not  indicate  moral  deterio- 
ration in  the  people. 

Beyond  all  question  there  was  a  distinct  and  general 
development  of  religious  feeling  and  principle  pro- 
duced in  the  South  by  the  War.^  Its  leaders,  both 
civil  and  military,  were,  as  a  rule,  distinctly  religious 
men.  We  have  seen  something  of  this  in  connection 
with  the  work  of  the  Church  in  the  army.  The  same 
was,  in  a  measure,  the  case  among  the  statesmen  of 

^  Bishop  Gregg,  whose  striking  testimony  upon  the  demoraUzing 
influence  of  the  War  spirit  in  1861  is  quoted  on  a  former  page,  remarks 
later  upon  the  opposite  effects  upon  the  pubUc  mind  as  the  struggle 
continued.  In  his  Convention  Address  in  1864-  he  says:  "The 
course  of  events  during  the  war,  with  its  impressive  teachings,  has 
deeply  affected  the  hearts  of  the  great  mass  of  our  people.  .  .  . 
The  greater  number  have  been  taught  by  His  providential  deal- 
ings, or  by  His  chastenings,  to  recognize,  and  think  more  devoutly, 
of  Him  Who  ruleth  over  all." 


158  THE    CHURCH 

the  Confederacy.  The  trials,  vicissitudes,  burdens, 
and  bereavements  of  a  war,  in  which  all  material 
forces  were  against  us,  served  to  bring  the  personal 
qualities  of  the  leading  men  into  greater  prominence. 
The  formal  utterances  of  state  papers  and  proclama- 
tions took  a  tone  of  reality,  and  touched  a  chord  of 
responsive  sentiment,  in  the  strain  of  a  life  and  death 
struggle  against  overwhelming  odds,  such  as  cannot  be 
known  in  times  of  lesser  stress.  The  word  passed 
from  mouth  to  mouth,  in  a  country  so  closely  knit 
together  in  personal  knowledge  and  association  as  was 
the  South  in  those  days,  that  such  a  Colonel,  eminent 
for  his  courage  and  achievements,  had  a  few  Sundays 
before  been  baptized  in  front  of  his  regiment;  and  the 
story  brought  home,  by  the  soldier  on  furlough,  of  the 
piety  of  his  General,  —  these  things  powerfully  affected 
the  public  sentiment  of  a  people,  who  began  to  see 
little  hope  of  success  in  mere  material  forces.  They 
saw  in  these  things  the  presence  of  a  higher  power. 
We  read  in  the  Convention  address  of  a  Southern 
Bishop  in  1863:  "I  cannot  refrain  from  expressing  my 
thankfulness  to  Almighty  God,  the  Ruler  of  Nations, 
for  having  raised  up  for  us  in  the  hour  of  our  need  a 
Chief  Magistrate  as  manly  in  piety  as  he  is  sage  in 
council  and  valorous  in  arms.  Among  the  many 
omens  which  have  cheered  our  people  in  their  unequal 
struggle,  none  has  so  affected  the  heart  of  your  Bishop 
as  the  intelligence  that  our  worthy  President  had 
openly  professed  his  faith  in  Christ,  and  laid  himself 
with  all  his  honors  at  His  feet."     This  refers,  of  course, 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   159 

to  the  confirmation  of  President  Davis  in  St.  Paul's 
Church,  Richmond.  The  consistent  purity  and  hi^h- 
minded  integrity  of  Mr.  Davis's  whole  life  made  this 
simple  act  of  Christian  duty  on  his  part  a  powerful 
testimony  to  the  people  over  whom  he  had  been  called 
to  preside.  It  had  been  remarked  that  he  closed  his 
Inaugural  Address  with  a  simple  and  devout  appeal 
to  the  Heavenly  Father:  "To  Thee,  O  God,  I  trust- 
fully commit  myself,  and  prayerfully  invoke  Thy 
blessing  on  my  country  and  its  cause."  An  illustra- 
tion of  this  same  spirit  may  be  given,  taken  from  later 
and  darker  days.  In  appointing  November  16,  1864, 
as  a  day  of  public  worship  and  supplication,  he  invites 
"The  people  of  these  Confederate  States  to  assemble 
in  their  respective  places  of  public  worship,  there  to 
unite  in  prayer  to  our  Heavenly  Father,  that  He  be- 
stow His  favor  upon  us;  that  He  extend  over  us  the 
protection  of  His  almighty  arm;  that  He. sanctify  His 
chastisement  to  our  improvement,  so  that  w^e  may 
turn  away  from  evil  paths,  and  walk  righteously  in 
His  sight;  and  that  He  may  restore  peace  to  our 
beloved  country,  healing  its  bleeding  wounds,  and 
securing  to  us  the  continued  enjoyment  of  our  own 
right  of  self-government  and  independence;  and  that 
He  will  graciously  hearken  to  us,  while  we  ascribe  to 
Him  the  power  and  glory  of  our  deliverance." 

Churchmen  in  the  South,  with  the  people  in  general, 
felt  much  satisfaction  in  the  formal  recognition  of  the 
Person  and  government  of  God,  contained  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  Confederate  States;   and  held  it  to  be 


160  THE    CHURCH 

one  of  the  very  great  improvements  in  that  document, 
as  compared  with  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States.  Unquestionably  there  was  an  increased 
thought  of,  and  trust  in,  the  divine  power,  as  all  other 
sources  of  help  seemed  cut  off.  Thus  were  our  people 
providentially  strengthened  in  faith  and  patience,  that 
they  might  bear  the  greater  loads  of  sorrow  and  suffer- 
ing which  the  future  held  in  store. 

One  of  the  greatest  difficulties  encountered  by  the 
Confederate  government  was  in  providing  for  the 
proper  care  of  the  sick  and  wounded  soldiers. 
Proper  provision,  in  any  adequate  sense,  the  govern- 
ment was  never  able  to  make;  and  in  the  first  stages 
of  the  conflict  it  might  almost  be  said  that  no  provision 
at  all,  in  many  cases,  could  be  made  by  the  public 
authorities.  Private  beneficence  came  to  the  aid  of 
the  destitute  medical  department,  and  all  during  the 
war  individual  charity  did  what  it  could  to  supply 
the  deficiencies  of  the  service,  and  to  supplement 
official  care.  In  the  language  of  a  distinguished  officer 
from  the  Carolinas,  who  served  throughout  the  war 
in  Lee's  army,  "Every  house  in  Virginia  was  a  hos- 
pital," so  unstinted  was  the  response  of  the  people 
to  the  demands  made  by  the  necessities  of  the  suffering 
soldiers.  In  the  Church  papers  of  the  day  are  appeals 
from  the  surgeons  of  the  army  to  the  people  for  con- 
tributions from  their  scanty  and  fast -diminishing  house- 
hold stores,  to  supply  the  hastily  extemporized  hospitals 
with  such  necessary  articles  and  remedies  as  they  might 
possess;  and  seldom  were  such  appeals  unheeded. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   IGl 

As  an  illustration  of  the  methods  of  those  days,  the 
case  of  the  sick  and  wounded  soldiers,  cai)tured  at 
Newbern  in  the  spring  of  18()2,  may  be  mentioned. 
The  Federal  commander,  shortly  after  taking  possession 
of  Newbern,  put  the  sick  and  wounded  Confederate 
soldiers,  whom  he  found  in  the  hospital,  on  a  steam- 
boat, and  sent  them  around  by  the  Pamlico  river  to 
Washington,  N.  C,  and  so  up  the  river  to  Tarborough, 
and  delivered  them  under  parole  to  the  Confederate 
authorities.  With  them  were  a  Confederate  sur- 
geon, and  a  distinguished  physician  of  Tarborough,^ 
who  had  volunteered  his  services  in  the  Newbern 
hospital.  There  was  in  Tarborough  no  hospital  build- 
ing; there  were  no  hospital  stores,  medicines,  surgical 
appliances,  or  provisions  of  any  kind  for  the  reception 
and  care  of  the  sick  and  wounded,  more  than  could  be 
found  in  any  other  small  country  town  of  that  day  in 
the  South.  In  this  emergency  a  large  academy  build- 
ing was  taken  for  a  hospital,  and  one  soldier  patient 
was  assigned  to  each  family  in  the  tow  n,  or,  in  the  case 
of  a  few  of  the  more  opulent,  two  patients  to  a  family. 
The  family,  to  whom  the  patient  w^as  assigned,  under- 
took to  supply  him  with  such  things  as  he  needed, 
bedding,  clothing,  and  food  prepared  and  sent  to  the 
hospital  three  times  daily,  under  the  direction  of  the 
surgeons  in  charge.  Thus  the  immediate  necessity  w^as 
met,  and  the  hospital  supplied,  after  a  fashion. 

In  this  work  of  caring  for  the  sick  and  wounded  the 
Church  found   an   unlimited   and  increasing  demand 

^  Surgeon  Wm.  A.  Blount  and  the  late  Dr.  N.  J.  Pittman. 
12 


162  THE    CHURCH 

upon  the  hearts  and  hands  of  its  clergy  and  people. 
No  reckoning  can  ever  be  made  in  this  world  of  the 
blessed  work  of  noble  women  and  pious  laymen  in  this 
field.  In  the  region  of  actual  hostilities,  personal  ser- 
vice among  the  wounded  and  dying  in  the  hospitals 
formed  a  large  part  of  the  regular  pastoral  work  of  the 
clergy.  In  places  distant  from  field  and  hospital,  the 
people  organized  for  systematic  contributions  of  money 
and.  supplies.  As  early  as  August,  1861,  the  Bishop 
of  Georgia  issued  a  Pastoral  to  his  Diocese,  foreseeing 
the  necessity,  and  urging  the  formation,  in  every  parish, 
of  an  organization  to  work  systematically  for  a  supply 
of  clothing  for  the  soldiers;  to  prepare  hospital  sup- 
plies, such  as  bandages,  lint,  and  the  like,  to  be  laid  up 
against  the  time  of  need;  to  raise  money  to  purchase 
medicines;  and  to  secure  fit  persons  to  volunteer  as 
nurses  in  the  hospitals.  The  clergyman  of  each  parish 
was  requested  to  assume  the  direction  of  this  work, 
selecting  a  suitable  layman  of  the  parish  to  serve  as 
secretary  and  treasurer  of  the  local  organization.  We 
do  not  know  to  what  extent  this  was  carried  into  effect. 
In  the  spring  of  1862  the  Rev.  Benjamin  M.  Miller, 
of  Natchez,  resigned  his  parish,  and  organized  the  "Fe- 
male Hospital  Aid  Society,"  to  work  under  his  direction 
in  the  hospitals.  "They  expect  to  go  to  the  hospitals 
nearest  the  army,  so  as  to  be  ready,  in  case  of  a  battle, 
to  minister,  as  far  as  they  can,  to  those  who  may  require 
such  aid."  A  few  weeks  later  we  read  in  Bishop 
Green's  Convention  address  of  1862:  "Rev.  Benjamin 
M.  Miller  is,  for  the  present,  engaged  in  the  praise- 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   1G3 

worlliy  occupation  of  succoring  our  wounded  soldiers. 
Attended  by  a  faithful,  self-denying  band  of  Sisters- 
in-Christ,  he  is  ministering  to  both  the  bodily  and 
spiritual  needs  of  these  brave  men  who  lately  suffered 
for  us  on  the  field  of  Shiloh." 

In  1863  we  find  Bishop  Lay  recording  in  his  private 
journal,  how  in  Little  Rock  he  met  the  ladies  (probably 
of  the  community  in  general),  and  organized  them, 
fifty-five  in  number,  into  four  committees,  each  under 
its  proper  leader,  for  service  in  the  four  hospitals  in 
Little  Rock,  which  then  contained  four  hundred  and 
fifty  patients.  He  mentions  the  distribution  by  these 
ladies  of  five  hundred  "bed  comforts"  to  the  patients 
in  these  hospitals.  A  few  days  later  he  notes  the  fact 
that  the  church  had  been  dismantled,  and  given  up 
for  a  hospital,  and  says  that  he  had  given  all  his  "car- 
pets to  cover  the  sick."  In  the  absence  of  a  sufficient 
supply  of  blankets,  woollen  carpets  were  often  cut  up 
to  make  coverings  for  the  soldiers,  in  the  field  as  well 
as  in  the  hospitals. 

And  among  the  heavy  burdens  of  those  days  not  the 
least  was  the  thought  of  sons  and  husbands  and  fathers, 
and  brothers  and  friends,  languishing  in  distant  prisons, 
at  Point  Lookout,  at  Johnson's  Island,  and  the  other 
military  prisons  of  the  North.  The  petition  in  the 
Litany,  for  "a/Z  prisoners  and  captives,^'  came  then  to 
have  its  first  real  meaning  for  many  worshippers  in 
the  Church  service.  The  policy  of  the  Federal  gov- 
ernment refused  all  exchange  of  prisoners  for  long 
periods,  and  thereby  deliberately  subjected  their  own 


164  THE    CHURCH 

soldiers,  held  prisoners  in  the  South,  to  those  condi- 
tions of  want  and  suffering  and  disease,  which  the 
Confederate  authorities  were  absolutely  helpless  to 
prevent.  And,  as  bearing  upon  the  condition  and 
treatment  of  prisoners  of  War  in  the  North  and  in  the 
South,  it  should  be  remembered  that  statistics,  pub- 
lished by  the  government  since  the  War,  show  that  the 
percentage  of  mortality  was  very  much  greater  among 
the  Southern  prisoners  in  the  North  than  among  the 
Northern  prisoners  in  the  South.  Among  the  special 
prayers  put  forth  during  the  War,  not  the  least  im- 
pressive and  affecting  is  one  by  the  Bishop  of  North 
Carolina:  ^'For  our  Soldiers  now  held  Prisoners  by  the 
Enemy.'' 

A  correspondent  of  The  Church  Intelligencer,  from 
Danville,  Va.,  in  January,  1864,  gives  an  interesting 
account  of  a  service  held  in  the  Danville  hospital  for 
Federal  prisoners,  filled  with  the  sick  and  wounded, 
by  two  Confederate  chaplains,  the  Rev.  James  Car- 
michael  and  the  Rev.  Alfred  M.  Randolph,  now  Bishop 
of  Southern  Virginia.  The  service  was  attended  also 
by  citizens  of  Danville,  and  by  some  Confederate 
soldiers.  The  WTiter  says:  "A  cloud  of  dark  blue  ex- 
tending down  the  ward.  ...  A  few  of  our  soldiers 
entered  the  room,  and  quietly  took  their  seats,  the  Fed- 
erals making  room  for  them,  dotting  the  dark  blue 
here  and  there  with  gray.  Together  we  sang  and  knelt 
and  prayed,  friend  and  foe,  refugee  and  prisoner,  .  .  . 
and  heard  the  love  and  liberty  of  the  Gospel  pro- 
claimed.    In  front  of  me  sat  a  Federal  bathed  in  tears; 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   165 

behind  me  sat  a  Confederate  similarly  affected; 
thoughts  of  the  past  and  of  the  present  rushed  over 
me  in  overwhelming  tide.  God  grant  that  such  scenes 
may  dispose  us  to  an  honorableandi)eaceful  separation." 
The  following  lines,  appearing  in  the  newspapers  of 
that  day,  and  signed  with  the  pen-name,  Personne, 
of  a  distinguished  correspondent^  of  the  Charleston 
press,  have  at  least  one  element  of  true  poetry;  they 
speak  out  of  the  very  heart  of  those  days,  and  of  their 
deepest  experiences. 

A  CALL  TO  THE  HOSPITAL 

Fold  away  all  your  bright-tinted  dresses. 

Turn  the  key  on  your  jewels  today. 
And  the  wealth  of  your  tendril-like  tresses 

Braid  back  in  a  serious  way; 
No  more  delicate  gloves,  no  more  laces. 

No  more  trifling  in  boudoir  or  bower. 
But  come,  with  your  souls  in  your  faces. 

To  meet  the  stern  wants  of  the  hour. 

Look  around.     By  the  torch  light  unsteady 

The  dead  and  the  dying  seem  one. 
What!  trembling  and  paling  already. 

Before  your  dear  mission's  begun? 
These  wounds  are  more  precious  than  ghastly; 

Time  presses  her  lips  to  each  scar, 
"While  she  chants  of  the  glory  which  vastly 

Transcends  all  the  horrors  of  war. 

Pause  here  by  this  bed-side.     How  mellow 
The  light  showers  down  on  that  brow! 

Such  a  brave,  brawny  visage!     Poor  fellow! 
Some  homestead  is  missing  him  now: 

1  F.  G.  DeFontaine. 


166  THE    CHURCH 

Some  wife  shades  her  eyes  in  the  clearing; 

Some  mother  sits  moaning,  distressed; 
While  the  loved  one  lies,  faint  but  unfearing. 

With  the  enemy's  ball  in  his  breast. 

Pass  on;  it  is  useless  to  linger. 

While  others  are  claiming  your  care. 
There  is  need  for  your  delicate  finger, 

For  your  womanly  sympathy,  there; 
There  are  sick  ones  athirst  for  caressing, 

There  are  dying  ones  raving  of  home. 
There  are  wounds  to  be  bound  with  a  blessing, 

And  shrouds  to  make  ready  for  some. 

They  have  gathered  about  you  the  harvest 

Of  death  in  its  ghastliest  view; 
The  nearest  as  well  as  the  farthest. 

Is  here,  with  the  traitor  and  true. 
And  crowned  with  your  beautiful  patience, 

Made  sunny  with  love  at  the  heart. 
You  must  balsam  the  wounds  of  a  nation. 

Nor  falter  nor  shrink  from  your  part. 

Up  and  down  through  the  wards,  where  the  fever 

Stalks  noisome,  and  gaunt,  and  impure. 
You  must  go  with  your  steadfast  endeavor 

To  comfort,  to  counsel,  to  cure. 
I  grant  that  the  task's  superhuman. 

But  strength  will  be  given  to  you 
To  do  for  these  dear  ones  what  woman 

Alone  in  her  pity  can  do. 

And  the  lips  of  the  mothers  will  bless  you, 

As  angels  sweet-visaged  and  pale! 
And  the  little  ones  run  to  caress  you. 

And  the  wives  and  sisters  cry,  "Hail!'* 
But  e'en  if  you  drop  down  unheeded; 

What  matter?     God's  ways  are  the  best. 
You  have  poured  out  your  life  where  'twas  needed. 

And  He  will  take  care  of  the  rest. 


VI 

SOME  OF  THE  TRIALS  AND  TRIBULATIONS  OF 
THE  TIMES.  BISHOP  VVILMEU'S  TROUBLES 
IN    1865 

In  his  Convention  address  in  1861,  the  Bishop  of 
Mississippi  thus  sets  forth  his  conception  of  the  rela- 
tionship between  Churchmen  North  and  South,  and 
the  brotherly  spirit  which  they  would  preserve,  even 
amid  civil  and  political  dissensions:  "But  whilst  the 
State  is  thus  passing  through  the  fires  of  a  painful 
revolution,  how  thankful  should  we  be  that  the  Church 
is  at  peace,  and  that  though  our  political  relations 
toward  our  brethren,  with  whom  we  have  hitherto  so 
lovingly  associated,  have  been  severed,  no  change  of 
name,  of  government,  or  national  interest,  will  be  able 
to  lessen  our  affection  for  them  as  fellow  members  of 
the  One  Holy  and  Apostolic  Communion  which  is  in 
Christ  our  Lord.  If  a  separate  and  independent  eccle- 
siastical organization  shall  be  demanded  by  the  change 
in  our  political  relations,  it  will  exhibit  to  the  world 
a  division  without  dissension,  a  separation  without 
injury  to  the  respective  parts,  a  parting  of  brothers 
amid  tears  of  affection,  and  with  mutual  commending 
of  each  other  to  God.  In  what  a  beautiful  light  will 
such  action  exhibit  the  CathoHc  spirit  of  the  Church! 
Unmoved  by  the  changes  and  chances  of  the  political 
world,  she  pursues  the  even  tenor  of  her  way,  holding 

167 


168  THE    CHURCH 

forth  to  every  age  and  nation  the  bread  of  God,  un- 
tainted by  the  leaven  of  party  strife,  and  rich  in  all 
the  blessings  of  a  purchased  salvation." 

Similar  expressions  may  be  found  in  the  recorded 
utterances  of  other  Bishops,  and  of  Diocesan  Con- 
ventions in  the  South,  in  the  opening  days  of  the 
struggle.  So  satisfied  were  both  clergy  and  people  of 
the  permanent  character  of  the  political  separation  be- 
tween the  sections,  and  of  the  necessity  of  a  separate 
organization  for  the  Church,  as  a  consequence  of  polit- 
ical independence,  that  it  did  not  occur  to  them  that 
others  could  take  a  different  view;  and  they  seem  to 
have  felt  quite  sure  that  amid  all  civil  and  political 
trials  the  Church  would  manifest  only  the  benign 
spirit  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  unbroken  charity  of 
Christian  brethren. 

These  pleasing  anticipations  were  not  fulfilled  in  the 
experience  of  the  years  immediately  following.  And 
yet  they  had  some  justification  in  the  real  character 
and  heart  of  our  Churchmen,  North  and  South,  and 
in  the  true  principles  of  the  Church;  and  when  the 
clouds  of  war  began  to  lighten  and  roll  away,  and  the 
bhnding  influences  of  the  contest,  with  its  heat  and 
passion,  began  to  abate,  the  Church  of  our  love,  first 
of  all  the  great  institutions  of  the  reunited  country, 
showed  forth  the  spirit  of  Christian  forbearance, 
mutual  compliance,  and  godly  union  and  concord. 

And  in  order  that  we  may  have  some  faint  concep- 
tion of  the  difficulties  of  the  situation,  and  of  the  won- 
derful   development    of    self-conquest,    patience,    and 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   1G9 

magnanimity  involved  in  the  prompt  reunion  of  the 
separated  parts  so  soon  after  the  close  of  war,  it  is 
necessary  to  refer  briefly  to  some  of  the  painful  occur- 
rences of  the  preceding  years,  and  to  some  of  the  diffi- 
cult questions  raised  by  the  events  of  that  time. 

The  fact  that  in  our  prescribed  formularies  of  public 
worship  there  is  distinct  mention  made  of  both  the 
executive  and  the  legislative  departments  of  the  gov- 
ernment, exposed  the  clergy  of  the  Church  to  peculiar 
embarrassment,  whenever  any  part  of  the  territory  of 
the  Confederate  States  was  occupied  by  the  Federal 
forces.  So  far  as  appears,  other  Christian  ministers 
were,  as  a  rule,  not  interfered  with,  unless  by  some 
intemperate  word  or  action  they  specially  invited  the 
attention  of  the  Federal  authorities.  But  the  most 
cautious  and  prudent  conduct  did  not  secure  the  clergy 
of  the  Church  from  hostile  animadversion;  and  in 
many  cases  they  were  treated  with  great  injustice, 
cruelty,  and  outrage.  For  in  their  Sunday  ministrations 
their  sense  of  allegiance  to  their  Diocese  and  Bishop, 
as  well  as  to  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States, 
laid  upon  them  the  duty  of  praying  for  the  President 
of  the  Confederate  States.  In  some  cases  they  felt  jus- 
tified in  omitting  altogether  the  prayer  for  those  in  civil 
authority.  In  very  few  cases  did  they  feel  that  they 
could  use  the  prayer  for  the  President  or  the  Congress 
of  the  United  States.  To  the  credit  of  many  of  the 
oflBcers  of  the  United  States  army,  occupying  Southern 
towns  and  cities,  they  seemed  anxious  to  avoid,  as  far 
as  possible,  any  interference  with  the  religious  worship 


170  THE    CHURCH 

of  the  people;  and  where  these  prayers  were  passed 
over  they  did  not  concern  themselves  with  the  matter. 
Indeed  there  are  instances  in  which  they  seem  to  have 
been  anxious  that  the  clergy  should  not  be  disturbed 
in  their  work,  and  to  that  end  gave  assurance  that  they 
should  not  be  molested,  or  any  way  hindered,  so  long 
as  all  political  questions  were  avoided.  When  in  the 
spring  of  1862  Newbern  was  occupied  by  the  United 
States  forces,  the  Rev.  Wm.  R.  Wetmore,  assistant  to 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Watson,  was  in  charge  of  the  church,  the 
rector  having  become  a  chaplain  in  the  Confederate 
army.  In  the  address  of  Bishop  Atkinson  to  the 
Convention  of  1862,  and  in  the  report  of  the  Rev.  Dr. 
W^atson  to  the  same  Convention,  it  is  stated  that  the 
Rev.  Mr.  W^etmore  had  not  been  allowed  to  continue 
his  ministrations,  because  he  would  not  promise  to  use 
the  prayer  for  the  President  of  the  United  States. 
This,  however,  proved  to  be  erroneous.  WTien  Mr. 
Wetmore  was  able  to  leave  Newbern,  and  to  come 
within  the  Confederate  lines,  he  published  a  statement 
to  the  effect  that  the  Bishop  and  Dr.  W^atson  had  been 
misinformed,  and  that  the  Federal  authorities  had 
proposed  to  him  that  he  should  continue  his  ministra- 
tions in  the  church,  and  simply  omit  the  prayer  for 
those  in  civil  authority.  A  letter  from  New  Orleans 
in  February,  1863,  mentions  that  St.  Luke's  Church 
had  been  reopened,  and  that  the  clergyman  omitted 
the  prayer  for  the  President.  In  June,  1864,  Bishop 
Green  made  a  visitation  to  "Vicksburg,  then  in  pos- 
session of  the  Federal  authorities."     He  remained  five 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   171 

days,  and  visited  all  the  Church  families  remaining  in 
the  place,  and  preached  Sunday,  June  5.  He  says, 
"I  feel  bound  to  acknowledge  here  the  courtesy  with 
which  I  was  treated  during  my  stay,  by  the  command- 
ing General  and  his  officers."  In  October  following  he 
writes  in  his  journal,  under  the  date  Thursday,  the 
13th:  "On  the  same  day  I  entered  Natchez,  then  gar- 
risoned by  a  considerable  force  of  the  enemy.  It  was 
with  difficulty  that  I  gained  admittance,  but  I  must 
acknowledge  the  kind  treatment  which  I  received  from 
the  commanding  General,  after  getting  in.  During 
the  five  days  w^hich  I  spent  in  the  city,  every  facility 
was  allowed  me  for  the  prosecution  of  my  work." 
He  preached  there  Sunday,  October  16.  Knowing 
what  we  do  of  Bishop  Green,  and  of  his  conception  of 
his  duty,  we  cannot  believe  that  in  those  services  in 
Vicksburg  and  Natchez  he  used  the  prayer  for  the 
President  of  the  United  States;  and  it  is  equally  im- 
possible to  believe  that  he  thus  thrust  himself  into  the 
midst  of  the  garrisoned  posts  of  the  enemy  to  pray  for 
the  President  of  the  Confederate  States;  or  that  he 
could  have  done  so  without  arousing  feelings,  and 
subjecting  himself  to  treatment,  very  different  from 
what  is  implied  in  his  grateful  acknowledgment  of 
the  courtesies  and  consideration  which  he  had  received 
in  both  cases  from  the  Federal  officers.  We  must 
conclude  that  there  was  mutual  concession  in  omitting 
those  parts  of  the  service  involving  matters  of  differ- 
ence, which,  to  a  moderate  and  judicious  mind,  would 
seem  most  creditable  to  all  parties.     Many  other  in- 


172  THE    CHURCH 

stances  of  a  like  spirit  of  mutual  compliance  and  ac- 
commodation might  be  given. 

Unfortunately  all  the  Federal  authorities  were  not 
thus  tolerant.  In  many  cases  the  military  officer,  who 
found  himself  temporarily  in  command  in  a  Southern 
town,  somehow  managed  to  persuade  himself  that  he 
was  vested  with  Episcopal,  or  even  Papal,  authority, 
and  that  it  was  his  duty  to  regulate  the  worship  of 
the  Church,  and  to  exact  of  the  local  clergyman  obedi- 
ence to  his  idea  of  what  the  canons  of  the  Church  and 
the  rubrics  of  the  Prayer  Book  require.  "At  Pine 
Bluff  [Ark.],  as  the  Rev.  Mr.  Trimble  was  reading  the 
service  on  Tuesday,  as  he  passed  from  the  Collect  for 
Grace  to  the  Litany,  omitting  the  Prayer  for  the 
President,  Col.  Clayton,  the  Federal  commander,  cried 
out  in  a  loud  voice,  'Stop,  sir!'  and  marched  into  the 
desk  by  Mr.  Trimble's  side,  and  read  the  Prayer  for 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  then  resumed 
his  place  in  the  congregation.  At  the  close  of  the 
service,  Mr.  Trimble  gave  notice  that  he  should  not 
officiate  again  for  the  present."  It  was  reported  in 
the  Church  papers  that  at  Nashville,  Tenn.,  after  that 
city  had  been  occupied  by  the  Federals,  General 
McCook  told  the  Rev.  Mr.  Harris  to  "use  the  prayers 
just  as  they  are  printed  in  the  Prayer  Book,  or  be 
punished." 

One  of  the  most  violent  outrages  committed  upon  a 
clergyman  of  the  Church  took  place  in  St.  Paul's  Church, 
Alexandria,  Va.,  February  9,  1862,  when  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Stewart,  rector  of  the  church,  during  the  Litany,  was 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   173 

ordered  by  an  agent  of  the  government  to  say  the 
Prayer  for  the  President  of  the  United  States.  Dr. 
Stewart  proceeded  without  paying  any  attention  to 
the  scandalous  interruption;  but  a  captain  and  his 
soldiers,  who  were  present  in  the  congregation  for  the 
purpose,  drew  their  swords  and  pistols,  intruded  into 
the  chancel,  seized  the  clergyman  as  he  knelt  and  was 
about  to  begin  the  petition  to  be  delivered  from  all  evil 
and  mischief,  etc.,  held  pistols  to  his  head,  and  forced 
him  out  of  the  church,  and  through  the  streets,  just  as 
he  was,  in  his  surplice  and  stole,  and  committed  him 
to  the  guard-house  of  the  8th  Illinois  Cavalry.  He 
was  soon  released,  but  was  not  allowed  to  continue  to 
officiate;  and  by  the  same  requirement,  that  prayers 
should  be  said  for  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
all  the  clergy  of  Alexandria  were  forced  to  cease  offi- 
ciating, and  their  churches  were  closed. 

Upon  the  occupation  of  New  Orleans  by  the  Federals, 
the  clergy  of  the  Church  endeavored  to  meet  the 
difficulty,  and  to  avoid  giving  offence  to  the  United 
States  authorities,  by  omitting  Morning  and  Evening 
Prayer,  using  only  the  Litany  and  the  Office  of  the 
Holy  Communion.  This  served  for  some  months,  but 
in  September,  1862,  the  military  governor  issued  an 
order  that  "the  omission,  in  the  service  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  New  Orleans,  of  the  prayer  for 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  would  be  regarded 
as  evidence  of  hostility  to  the  government  of  the 
United  States."  To  this  the  clergy  replied,  that  in 
omitting  the  prayer  for  those  in  civil  authority  they 


174  THE    CHURCH 

had  endeavored  to  avoid  all  occasion  of  offence,  and 
they  denied  the  right  of  the  civil  or  military  authorities 
to  prescribe  in  matters  ecclesiastical,  or  to  demand  of 
them  more  than  that  care  to  avoid  occasion  of  offence 
which  they  had  already  been  diligent  in  observing. 
Dr.  Fulton  says  that  "Shepley,  the  military  governor, 
who  was  a  Churchman,  admitted  that  he  could  not 
punish  men  who  were  acting  on  such  principles,  and 
the  matter  dropped  for  a  few  weeks,  until  the  return 
of  the  commanding  general,  Butler.  Then,  without 
previous  notice,  the  service  at  St.  Paul's  Church  was 
interrupted  by  the  entrance  of  an  officer,  followed  by 
a  squad  of  soldiers  with  fixed  bayonets.  The  rector 
Dr.  Goodrich,  was  ordered  to  desist,  and  he  at  once 
quietly  dismissed  his  congregation  with  the  blessing 
of  peace.  The  rectors  of  Calvary  Church  and  Christ 
Church  were  also  arrested,  and  a  week  later  the  three 
were  sent  as  prisoners  to  New  York."  There  they 
were  released  on  parole,  but  not  allowed  to  return. 

Still  more  inexcusable  was  the  treatment  of  the 
Rev.  John  H.  D.  Wingfield,  of  Trinity  Church,  Ports- 
mouth, Va.,  afterwards  Missionary  Bishop  of  Northern 
California.  In  spite  of  the  most  prudent,  judicious 
and  inoffensive  conduct,  in  which  malice  itself  can 
point  to  no  flaw,  when  he  had  quietly  submitted  to 
the  military  order  forbidding  him  to  officiate  in  public 
or  in  private,  and  was  habitually  worshipping  in  a 
church  whose  rector  had  taken  the  oath  of  allegiance, 
and  was  using  the  prayer  for  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  upon  the  charge  that  within  the  screened 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   175 

choir-gallery,  where  he  worshipped,  he  had  raised  his 
head  during  the  Prayer  for  the  President,  Dr.  Wing- 
field  was  arrested,  taken  to  prison,  required  to  assume 
the  uniform  of  a  criminal,  and  sentenced  to  the  work 
of  cleaning  the  streets  of  Norfolk,  **to  atone  for  his 
disloyalty  and  treason."  So  much  of  the  sentence 
as  related  to  working  upon  the  public  streets  was 
remitted,  upon  a  petition  numerously  signed  by  the 
people  of  Norfolk  and  Portsmouth,  but  the  order 
published  by  General  Butler,  in  granting  this  partial 
remission  of  the  sentence,  was  so  grossly  false  and 
malicious  in  the  terms  applied  to  the  prisoner,  that  it 
only  added  to  the  infamy  of  its  author  and  of  the  whole 
transaction. 

Even  the  Bishops  did  not  wholly  escape.  May  2, 
1862,  Bishop  Lay,  being  for  the  time  at  his  old  home  in 
Huntsville,  Alabama,  was,  with  eleven  citizens  of  that 
community,  arrested  by  General  Mitchell,  the  Federal 
commander,  and  imprisoned  under  guard  in  one  of 
the  rooms  of  the  Court  House.  No  charge  whatever 
was  made  against  them;  and  upon  being  brought 
before  General  Mitchell  the  next  day,  Bishop  Lay 
and  two  others,  chosen  to  represent  the  prisoners, 
were  informed  by  that  oflBcer  that  "against  them 
personally  he  had  no  charges.  He  had  arrested  them 
in  a  time  of  some  excitement,  in  order  to  show  that  no 
one  in  the  community  was  beyond  arrest,  that  the 
innocent  must  often  suffer  with  the  guilty,"  etc.  He 
then  required  them,  as  the  condition  of  being  released, 
to  sign  a  paper  denouncing  certain  acts  of  guerrilla 


176  THE    CHURCH 

warfare,  and  attacks  upon  Federal  soldiers,  which  he 
said  had  been  committed,  and  to  declare  that  the 
perpetrators  "deserve,  and  should  receive,  the  punish- 
ment of  death."  These  gentlemen  naturally  objected 
to  being  required  to  denounce,  in  such  terms,  persons 
of  whom  and  of  w^hose  deeds  they  were  wholly  ignorant, 
and  with  whom  they  w^ere  not  even  charged  with  having 
any  kind  of  connection  or  sympathy.  The  Bishop 
and  his  fellow  prisoners  were  much  more  than  a  match 
for  the  General  in  the  discussions  which  followed, 
maintaining,  by  citations  from  Vattel,  Kent,  and 
other  authorities  on  international  law,  their  right  to 
refuse  to  sign  the  papers  submitted  to  them  by  General 
Mitchell.  But  it  is  an  old  saying,  Inter  arma  leges 
silent,  and,  after  an  imprisonment  of  twelve  days, 
they  consented  to  purchase  their  release,  by  signing  a 
paper  condemning  all  acts  of  irregular  warfare  by 
citizens  not  enlisted  in  the  army.  May  14,  they  were 
released  on  parole. 

These  are  only  a  few  of  the  many  cases  which  might 
be  cited.  Bishop  Lay  was  again  arrested  and  im- 
prisoned at  the  end  of  the  war;  and  Bishop  Atkinson 
was  robbed  by  Sherman's  soldiers,  and  a  cocked  pistol 
held  to  his  head,  in  vain  attempt  to  compel  him  to 
comply  with  their  base  demands.^     These   things  are 

^It  is  worth  noting  that  the  two  Southern  Bishops,  Atkinson 
and  Lay,  who  seem  to  have  suffered  the  greatest  personal  outrage 
and  indignity  at  the  hands  of  the  Federal  forces,  were  the  two  who 
alone  attended  the  General  Convention  of  1865,  and  were  thus 
chiefly  instrumental  in  securing  the  prompt  reunion  of  the  separated 
Dioceses. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   177 

not  here  rcineiiibered  for  the  purpose  of  recalling  the 
bitter  anger  and  resentment  which  at  that  time  they 
could  not  fail  to  arouse  in  the  breasts  of  Southern 
Churchmen.  They  are  mentioned  simply  because 
they  are  part  of  the  history  of  the  time,  and  because, 
without  taking  them  into  account,  no  just  estimate 
can  be  formed  of  the  men  who  endured  such  treatment, 
and  yet  could  possess  their  souls  in  patience. 

It  can  easily  be  imagined  how  difficult  was  the  posi- 
tion of  a  clergyman  who  found  himself  the  rector  of  a 
parish  within  the  lines  of  the  Federal  occupation. 
Loyalty  to  his  Bishop,  and  to  his  convictions  of  patriotic 
duty,  required  him  to  pray  for  the  President  of  the 
Confederate  States.  If  he  should  omit  to  do  so,  in 
order  that  he  might  not  seem  to  offer  an  open  affront 
to  the  military  authority,  he  was  still  liable  to  the 
incalculable  annoyances  of  an  irresponsible  authority, 
unless  he  would  consent  to  use  the  public  prayers  for 
the  President  of  the  United  States.  It  was,  of  course, 
no  question  of  praying  for  the  President  as  an  act  of 
Christian  charity.  It  was  enforced  as  an  open  act  of 
penitence  and  submission  to  the  Federal  government, 
and  repudiation  of  allegiance  to  the  Southern  cause. ^ 

^  In  Bishop  Lay's  MS.  journal  of  his  experience  within  the  Federal 
lines,  in  the  fall  of  1864,  is  the  following  passage,  giving  a  conversa- 
tion between  the  Bishop  and  General  Sherman:  "He  [General  Sher- 
man] branched  off  here  to  say  that  he  was  for  letting  people  pray 
as  they  chose,  but  could  not  see  why  people  could  not  pray  for 
Lincoln,  or  'even  for  me.'  I  replied  that  there  was  no  objection  to 
praying  for  any  individual,  but  the  use  of  the  prayer  in  question 
was  the  acknowledgment  of  a  political  fact." 
13 


178  THE    CHURCH 

Understood  in  that  way  no  honorable  man  attached 
to  the  Southern  cause  could  consent  to  use  the  prayer. 
And  underlying  all  other  considerations  was  the 
fundamental  one,  that  it  was  one  of  the  accepted  princi- 
ples of  government,  both  North  and  South,  that  the 
civil  authority  should  not  interfere  with  the  freedom 
of  religious  worship.  A  military  or  civil  officer  might, 
perhaps,  prohibit  the  use  of  a  prayer  which  would  be 
commonly  understood  as  defying  the  authority  of 
government,  and  appealing  in  aid  of  the  public  enemy. 
Freedom  of  worship  might  well  be  understood  as 
limited  by  the  duty  of  submission  to  the  powers  that 
be.  But  certainly  the  powers  that  be  have  no  authority 
to  command  men  to  pray  for  them.  And  the  civil 
authority  has  nothing  to  do  with  enforcing  the  canons 
or  rubrics  of  the  Church. 

This  subject  very  early  attracted  the  attention  of 
the  Southern  clergy  and  Bishops.  In  1862  the  Bishop 
of  Alabama  advised  his  clergy,  in  case  their  parishes 
should  at  any  time  lie  within  the  Federal  lines,  to 
apply  to  the  officer  in  command,  to  know  if  the  clergy 
would  be  required  to  use  the  prayer  for  the  President 
of  the  United  States,  or  forbidden  to  use  the  prayer 
for  the  President  of  the  Confederate  States;  and  upon 
his  reply  that  he  should  require  the  one  or  forbid  the 
other,  the  Bishop  says,  "I  counsel  that  the  church 
should  be  closed."  This  was  an  extreme  position, 
and  Bishop  Wilmer's  instructions  in  this  case  gave  rise 
to  much  controversy.  It  was  urged  against  him 
that,   while   the   secular  power  has  no   authority   to 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   179 

prescribe  in  spiritual  matters,  the  Church,  rather 
than  abandon  her  proper  function  and  pu})Hc  ministra- 
tions, may  well  submit  so  far  as  to  refrain  from  pul>lic 
prayers  in  open  defiance  and  contempt  of  the  powers 
that  be;  that  de  facto  governments  may  demand  at 
least  this  measure  of  respect;  and  that  where  the  clergy- 
man, by  omitting  the  prayers  for  civil  rulers  altogether, 
could  secure  the  liberty  of  serving  his  people,  and  main- 
taining the  public  offices  of  the  Church,  he  should  do 
so,  and  not  sacrifice  his  work,  and  deprive  his  people 
of  his  ministrations;  —  that  he  should  to  that  extent 
submit  to  the  power  of  the  existing  government,  civil 
or  military,  since  he  could  gain  nothing  by  resisting  it. 
Another  difficulty  of  somewhat  the  same  nature 
was  encountered  by  those  who  found  themselves  within 
the  Federal  lines.  The  oath  of  allegiance  was  tendered 
to  the  people,  and  enforced  by  various  forms  of  penalty, 
disability,  and  threatening.  In  some  cases  doubtless 
it  was  taken  honestly  and  with  a  sincere  purpose  of 
keeping  it.  In  too  many  cases,  however,  it  is  to  be 
feared  that  it  was  taken  merely  for  purposes  of  advan- 
tage, or  under  the  influence  of  fear,  with  no  honest 
purpose  or  desire  to  observe  its  terms,  any  longer  than 
it  might  be  profitable  or  convenient  to  do  so.  The 
growing  temptation  to  disregard  the  solemn  sanctions 
of  an  oath  called  forth  a  strong  and  just  rebuke  from 
the  Bishop  of  Alabama:  "It  is  not  for  me,"  he  says, 
"in  this  presence,  and  acting  in  my  official  capacity, 
to  touch  upon  any  question  of  a  purely  political  nature. 
It  is  not  for  me  to  say  to  which  of  two  warring  govern- 


180  THE    CHURCH 

ments  a  man  should  give  his  adhesion,  nor  to  indicate 
under  what  circumstances  he  may  properly  transfer 
his  allegiance.  It  is,  however,  incumbent  upon  me 
to  premonish  the  clergy  and  laity  upon  a  great  question 
of  morals,  and  to  urge  them  to  take  heed  unto  them- 
selves, lest  through  an  unworthy  timidity,  or  an  unholy 
greediness  of  gain,  they  make  shipwreck  of  faith  and  a 
good  conscience,  and  do  dishonor  to  the  name  of  the 
great  God." 

The  churches,  left  vacant  by  the  enforcement  of 
regulations  to  which  the  local  clergy  could  not  conform, 
were  in  many  cases  supplied  with  services  by  Federal 
chaplains,  or  other  clergymen  from  the  North.  The 
circumstances  of  the  particular  case  sometimes  justified 
the  feeling  that  such  services  were  an  unwarranted 
intrusion,  an  outrage  upon  the  rights  of  both  the 
rector  and  the  parish.  In  other  instances  they  seem 
to  have  been  rendered  to  the  mutual  credit  and  edifica- 
tion of  all  parties  concerned.  We  read,  in  a  communi- 
cation from  Arkansas  in  The  Church  Intelligencer  of 
March  4,  1864:  "The  church  at  Little  Rock,  I  under- 
stand, is  occupied  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Peake,  a  chaplain 
in  the  Federal  army,  a  graduate  of  Nashota,  and 
formerly  Missionary  at  Crow  Wing,  Minnesota.  He 
is  said  to  be  a  kind  gentleman,  and  a  good  reader  and 
preacher."  It  seems  that  he  had  been  recommended 
to  the  vestry  by  the  Federal  commander,  and  was 
officiating  with  their  approval.  The  writer  continues: 
*'A  lady  who  came  out  soon  after  the  occupation, 
told  me  that  one  Sunday  the  officiating  clergyman 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   181 

gave  notice  that  I5ishop  Lay  had  been  heard  from  (I 
presume  from  some  letter  written  before  the  occupa- 
tion), and  that  he  expected  to  make  a  visitation  of  the 
parish  early  in  the  spring." 

It  is  perhaps  strange  that  there  was  not  more  trouble 
than  there  seems  to  have  been,  from  cases  of  intrusion, 
and  we  may  believe  that  it  does  indicate  a  substratum 
of  brotherly  feeling  in  the  hearts  of  Churchmen  on 
both  sides,  when  they  were  brought  into  personal  con- 
tact. Bishop  Mcllvaine  and  Bishop  Bedell  both 
oflSciated  in  Virginia,  on  the  southern  bank  of  the 
Ohio  river,  during  1863,  upon  request  of  the  local 
clergj'man;  and  young  Virginia  students,  graduating 
during  the  war  at  Gambier,  seem  to  have  been  ordained 
and  put  to  w  ork  in  the  same  section  by  the  Bishop  of 
Ohio.  In  1864  the  Rev.  Dr.  Addison,  of  Wheeling, 
sent  to  Bishop  Johns  a  request  to  be  allowed  to  invite 
some  neighboring  Bishop  to  administer  Confirmation 
in  his  parish,  promising  in  the  selection  "to  conform  as 
closely  as  practicable  to  his  known  wishes  on  the  subject.** 
Bishop  Johns  declined  to  give  the  permission  asked 
for,  but  offered  "to  go  himself,  on  his  parole  of  honor, 
to  perform  the  service,  if  the  Federal  authorities  would 
give  him  a  safe-conduct.  The  *  safe-conduct '  was 
never  given." 

And  so  at  last  the  end  came!  Lee  surrendered  his 
handful  of  worn  and  wearied,  but  undaunted,  followers; 
Johnston  and  Kirby -Smith  foUow^ed  the  same  inevitable 
necessity;  and  the  dream  of  the  Southern  Confederacy 
was  over.     But  how  did  this  affect  the  ecclesiastical 


182  THE    CHURCH 

organization  which  had  taken  for  its  name,  "The 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  Confederate  States 
of  America?" 

The  name  was  certainly  gone.  According  to  the 
theory,  "The  Church  must  follow  nationality," 
the  whole  question  was  settled.  And  one  Diocese  in 
the  South,  and,  so  far  as  appears,  one  only,  accepted 
promptly  and  courageously  the  logical  consequences 
of  that  principle  first  advanced  by  Bishop  Polk. 
Though  Bishop  Gregg  in  1861  seemed  to  take  a  different 
view  of  the  effect  of  the  secession  of  the  State,  and  spoke 
of  the  Church  going  on  with  its  unity  unbroken,  and 
the  communion  of  saints  undisturbed,  by  all  the  strifes 
and  mutations  of  the  world,  yet,  apparently  under 
the  spell  of  Bishop  Polk's  strong  character,  or  else 
infected  by  the  contagion  of  national  feeling  around 
him,  he  and  his  Diocese  in  1862  had  declared  it  to  be 
a  principle,  essential  in  the  external  order  of  the  Church, 
that  the  Church  must  be  organized  so  as  to  be  conter- 
minous with  the  nation.  And  in  the  Convention  of 
the  Diocese  held  June  15,  1865,  the  Bishop  of  Texas 
manfully  and  consistently  stood  to  the  principles 
which  he  had  professed  in  1862. 

There  was  no  truer  man  nor  a  more  godly,  and  no 
more  loyal  Churchman,  than  Alexander  Gregg.  He 
said  to  his  Convention,  when  the  war  in  the  trans- 
Mississippi  had  hardly  well  closed:  "Our  civil  and 
spiritual  work  and  relations,  as  I  have  heretofore 
urged  upon  you,  are  closely  and  inseparably  blended, 
and  there  is  a  Unity  pervading  the  whole,  which  cannot 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   183 

be  ignored  or  disturbed,  without  endangering  that  har- 
mony in  both,  which  it  is  one  of  the  cherished  objects 
of  Christianity  to  foster  and  perpetuate.  I  suggest 
therefore,  for  your  consideration,  in  order  to  the 
further  promotion  of  objects  so  important,  and  in 
accordance  with  the  principles  upon  which  we  have 
hitherto  acted,  the  propriety  of  taking  such  steps  as 
may  bring  about,  in  due  time,  a  return  to  our  former 
ecclesiastical  relations." 

Thereupon  the  Diocesan  Convention  at  once  adopted 
a  preamble  and  resolutions,  setting  forth  in  substance 
that,  whereas  they  had  acted  in  1862  "in  accordance 
with  the  practice  of  the  Church  in  all  ages,  in  yielding 
allegiance  to  the  government  of  the  Nation,  in  which 
the  Providence  of  God  had  placed  her,"  so  now  it  was 
resolved,  that  the  action  of  1862  be  rescinded;  and  the 
Constitution  of  the  Church  in  the  United  States  was 
acceded  to  and  recognized,  and  its  authority  acknowl- 
edged. Deputies  w^ere  elected  to  the  General  Conven- 
tion, and  the  Bishop  was  urged  to  use  his  efforts  to  have 
the  General  Council  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States  take  similar  action.  One  can  but  admire  the 
brave  simplicity  and  logical  consistency  of  the  course 
taken  by  the  Bishop  of  Texas  and  his  Convention. 

While  the  minds  of  the  Southern  Bishops  were  thus 
turning  towards  a  reunion  of  the  separated  Dioceses, 
an  unfortunate  complication  arose  in  Alabama,  which 
greatly  exasperated  the  Churchmen  of  that  Diocese, 
and   threatened   to   interrupt   the   growing   harmony 


184  THE    CHURCH 

between  Northern  and  Southern  brethren.  Bishop 
Wilmer  had  been  much  exercised  in  mind  over  the 
question  of  the  prayers  for  those  in  civil  authority, 
and  in  his  Diocesan  Convention  of  1864  had  proposed 
to  memoriaHze  the  General  Council  of  the  Church 
in  the  Confederate  States,  with  a  view  of  having  the 
phraseology  of  those  prayers  so  altered  that  they  might 
not  be  a  trap  to  catch  the  officiating  clergyman,  upon 
every  change  in  the  political  world.  He  thought  that 
the  terms  employed  should  be  so  framed  as  to  apply 
to  the  existing  civil  authority,  without  a  too  specific 
determination  of  the  particular  officers  or  government. 
It  is  but  fair  to  the  Bishop  of  Alabama,  that  we  should 
remember  that  he  had  urged  such  alterations  in  these 
prayers,  during  the  existence  of  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States. 

Upon  the  collapse  of  the  Confederate  government, 
and  the  occupation  of  the  entire  South  by  the  Federal 
armies,  Bishop  Wilmer,  May  30,  1865,  issued  a  brief 
Pastoral  to  his  Diocese,  and  June  20  followed  it  with 
a  more  elaborate  exposition  of  his  judgment  upon  the 
situation,  as  affecting  the  duty  of  the  clergy  and  people 
of  his  Diocese.  He  urged  entire  submission  and  obedi- 
ence to  the  authority  of  the  United  States,  and  loyal 
compliance  with  such  tests  of  civil  obedience  —  taking 
the  oath  of  allegiance  when  required,  and  the  like  — 
as  should  be  prescribed  by  the  authority  of  the  gov- 
ernment. He  himself  set  the  example  by  taking  the 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  United  States.  As  there  was 
no   longer   any   Confederate   States,   prayers   for   the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   185 

President  and  Congress  of  the  Confederate  States 
must  cease.  But  the  Church,  as  organized  within 
the  States  of  the  late  Confederacy,  had  not,  in  his 
judgment,  been  essentially  affected,  and  was  still  the 
ecclesiastical  organization  to  which  they  owed  their 
allegiance.  That  Church  had  prescribed  a  prayer 
for  those  in  Civil  Authority:  "The  language  of  that 
prayer  was  selected  with  careful  reference  to  the  subject 
of  the  prayer  —  'All  in  Civil  Authority';  and  she 
desires  for  that  authority  prosperity  and  long  continu- 
ance. No  one  can  reasonably  be  expected  to  desire  a 
long  continuance  of  military  rule.  Therefore,  the 
prayer  is  altogether  inappropriate  and  inapplicable 
to  the  present  condition  of  things,  when  no  civil  author- 
ity exists  in  the  exercise  of  its  functions.  We  may 
yield  a  true  allegiance  to,  and  sincerely  pray  for  grace, 
wisdom  and  understanding  in  behalf  of,  a  government 
founded  upon  force,  while  at  the  same  time  we  could 
not  in  good  conscience  ask  for  its  continuance,  pros- 
perity," etc. 

"When  the  civil  authority  shall  be  restored,  it  will 
be  eminently  proper  for  the  Church  to  resume  the  use 
of  that  prayer,"  etc.  He  adds,  at  the  end  of  his 
next  paragraph:  "It  is  not  for  me,  in  my  indi- 
vidual capacity,  to  introduce  into  the  Liturg;^^  any 
other  form  of  words  than  that  which  the  Church, 
in  her  collective  and  legislative  capacity,  has  already 
established." 

"  My  conclusion  is,  therefore,  and  my  direction,  which 
I  hereby  give,   that  w^hen  Civil  Authority  shall  be 


186  THE    CHURCH 

restored  in  the  State  of  Alabama,  the  Clergy  shall  use 
the  form  entitled  'A  Prayer  for  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  and  all  in  Civil  Authority,'  as  it  stands 
in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.'* 

Dr.  Fulton  says  that  in  a  private  conversation  with 
a  United  States  officer,  seeming  to  imply  that  he  was 
an  officer  in  high  command  in  Alabama,  Bishop  Wilmer 
so  justified  the  position  taken  in  his  Pastoral,  that  the 
officer  w^as  satisfied,  and  that  thus  present  trouble  was 
averted.  But  towards  the  latter  part  of  September, 
General  Thomas,  w^ho  commanded  in  that  Mihtary 
Department,  had  an  order  issued  through  his  subordi- 
nate, General  Woods,  charging  the  Bishop  with  having 
a  heart  filled  with  malice,  hatred,  and  uncharitableness, 
with  violating  the  canons  of  the  Church,  and  exhibiting 
a  factious  and  disloyal  spirit.  He  pronounced  the 
Bishop  to  be  an  unsafe  public  teacher,  and  therefore 
ordered  that  "the  said  Richard  Wilmer,  Bishop  of  the 
Diocese  of  Alabama,  and  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Clergy  of  the  said  Diocese,  be,  and  they  are  hereby, 
suspended  from  their  functions,  and  forbidden  to 
preach  or  perform  divine  service,  and  that  their  places 
of  worship  be  closed,  until  such  time  as  said  Bishop 
and  Clergy  show  a  sincere  return  to  their  allegiance, 
and  give  evidence  of  a  loyal  and  patriotic  spirit,  by 
offering  to  resume  the  use  of  the  Prayer  for  the  Presi- 
dent and  all  in  civil  authority,  and  by  taking  the 
amnesty  oath."  Upon  such  return  to  "a  loyal  spirit," 
the  order  further  required,  that  "application  for  per- 
mission to  preach  and  perform  divine  service"  must 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   187 

be  made  "through  the  mihtary  channels  to  these  head- 
quarters," etc. 

Even  at  this  late  day  it  is  difficult  to  restrain  one's 
indignation  at  the  insolence  and  utter  lawlessness  of 
such  an  order. ^  Bishop  Wilmer  read  this  military 
order  in  the  public  newspapers,  and  immediately 
addressed  a  courteous  note  to  General  Woods,  protest- 
ing against  the  order,  as  in  violation  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  and  of  the  rights  of  the  Church, 
and  inquiring  if  it  was  his  purpose  to  suppress  by 
force  the  services  of  the  Church.  "In  reply  the 
General  Commanding  stated  that  he  would,  if  necessary, 
use  military  force  in  closing  the  churches.'* 

Upon  receipt  of  this  reply  the  Bishop  issued  his 
Pastoral  Letter  of  September  28,  1865,  reiterating  his 
former  arguments,  and  declaring  his  determination  to 
maintain  the  authority  of  the  Church  in  the  ordering 
of  its  services.  He  thus  ably  and  effectively  sums  up 
the  case: 

^  A  secular  paper,  the  New  York  Daily  News,  gave  editorial 
expression  to  the  feelings  excited  by  this  order,  in  the  following  words: 
"Could  arrogance  or  assumption  go  further?  We  await  with  anxiety 
the  action  which  the  President  shall  take  upon  this  most  grave  assault 
upon  the  holiest  and  dearest  of  our  Constitutional  rights.  We  cannot 
believe  that  he  will  fail  to  rebuke  it  with  all  the  energy  he  can  com- 
mand. Unless  he  do  this,  the  praises  which  good  people  have  been 
showering  upon  him  will  no  longer  gladden  his  heart  or  strengthen 
his  hands."  Yet  it  was  three  months  and  more  before  anything  was 
done  to  relieve  the  Church  in  Alabama,  and  nothing  was  ever  done  to 
rebuke  this  arrogance  of  tyranny  and  lawlessness.  The  Bishops  in 
Philadelphia  expressed  their  "fraternal  regrets"  for  Bishop  Wilraer's 
manly  and  unanswerable  Protest,  but  no  one  dared  to  criticise  the 
*^  General  in  Command." 


188  THE    CHURCH 

"In  the  exercise  of  my  Episcopal  discretion,  to  which 
I  am  left  by  the  absence  of  any  authoritative  church 
legislation,  I  have  decided  that '  The  Prayer '  is  inappli- 
cable to  the  existing  condition  of  things.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Military  Authorities  issue  *  Orders'  that  it 
shall  be  used  at  once,  and  that  all  the  churches  shall 
be  closed  until  we  accede  to  the  demand.  Thus  the 
real  issue  before  us  is  this :  —  Shall  the  secular  or  the 
Ecclesiastical  power  regulate  the  worship  of  the 
Church?  In  this  conflict  of  powers  —  both  'ordained 
of  God '  in  their  respective  spheres  —  the  Church 
labors,  for  the  moment,  under  serious  disadvantages; 
for  we  have  neither  the  wish  nor  the  power  to  oppose 
force  by  force.  But  we  must  be  careful  to  make  it 
evident  that,  whilst  we  yield  to  military  force,  in  the 
matter  of  closing  our  houses  of  worship,  we  concede 
nothing  of  Church  Prerogative  to  Secular  Authority, 
Civil  or  Military.  .  .  . 

"I  counsel  you,  beloved  brethren  of  the  Clergy  and 
Laity,  in  the  name  of  God,  and  for  the  Honor  of  His 
Church,  to  stand  up  for  and  to  maintain,  at  whatever 
cost,  the  real  issue  now  before  us.  Be  assured  that  man 
has  no  nobler  mission  than  to  defend,  and  if  need  be 
to  suffer  for,  the  right.  Remember  that  the  communi- 
cations with  God's  mercy-seat  cannot  be  obstructed 
by  any  created  power,  and  that  the  compensations  of 
Divine  Goodness  will  supply  all  our  needs,  through 
the  riches  of  His  Grace  in  Christ  Jesus,  our  only 
Lord  and  Master." 

Within  a  month  of  the  date  of  this  letter  the  Pro- 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   189 

visional  Governor,  appointed  hy  the  President,  assumed 
office,  and  issued  a  proclamation  declaring  the  re- 
establishment  of  the  civil  authority.  Thereupon  the 
Bishop  of  Alabama  addressed  to  him  a  letter,  calling  his 
attention  to  the  fact  that  he  and  his  clergy,  in  plain 
violation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
and  of  a  fundamental  principle  of  all  our  American 
institutions,  were  prevented  by  military  force  from 
the  performance  of  their  religious  function.  The 
very  limited  character  of  the  civil  authority  repre- 
sented by  the  Governor  only  allowed  of  his  sending 
to  the  Bishop  a  courteous  response,  and  promising 
to  lay  the  matter  before  the  President.  In  due  course 
Bishop  Wilmer  was  informed  that  the  matter  had 
been  laid  before  President  Johnson,  "and  that  there 
was  no  prospect  of  the  order  being  rescinded." 

Thinking  that  the  whole  Church  must  needs  be 
interested  in  so  flagrant  a  violation  of  the  principles 
of  religious  liberty,  and  that  it  would  become  the 
National  Council  of  the  Church,  the  General  Conven- 
tion which  met  in  Philadelphia  the  first  week  in  October, 
1865,  to  interpose  at  least  a  protest  against  this  arbi- 
trary act  of  a  military  officer  in  time  of  peace,  the  Bishop 
of  Alabama,  in  a  brief  letter  to  several  of  the  Northern 
Bishops,  informed  them  of  the  situation  of  the  Church 
in  his  Diocese.  He  did  not  ask  or  expect  aid  in  his 
own  behalf.  He  writes:  "Not  that  I  personally 
solicit  your  help.  By  God's  grace  I  trust  to  maintain 
my  stand.  But  the  time  is  propitious,  and  the  oppor- 
tunity offers,  to  affirm  and  maintain  a  great  principle.'* 


190  THE    CHURCH 

This  appeal  met  with  no  adequate  response.  It  is 
said  that  some  of  the  Bishops  were  disposed  to  enter  a 
protest  against  the  wrong  done  to  the  Bishop  and 
Diocese  of  Alabama,  but,  if  so,  nothing  came  of  it 
more  than  a  futile  visit  of  one  or  two  of  the  Bishops 
to  Washington.  Military  power  still  defied  the  Con- 
stitution and  laws  of  the  country,  and  suppressed  the 
worship  of  the  Church. 

November  27,  Bishop  Wilmer  addressed  a  letter 
to  the  President,  saying  that,  being  informed  that  the 
order  complained  of  had  been  communicated  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  he  could  no  longer 
consider  it  the  mere  act  of  a  subordinate,  but,  not 
being  rescinded,  "it  is  virtually  sustained  by  the 
President.**  He  therefore  feels  justified  in  calling  the 
attention  of  the  President  to  the  true  nature  of  the 
act  as  a  violation  of  the  Constitution,  and  an  inter- 
ference with  the  rights  of  the  Church,  and  with  his 
rights  as  an  individual  citizen  accused  of  no  violation 
of  the  law  of  the  land: 

"For  all  which  reasons,  and  chiefly  for  the  high 
reason  that  the  secular  power  has  no  authority  in  the 
Church  of  God,  either  in  framing  her  creed,  or  in 
prescribing  her  worship,  or  in  any  way  interfering  with 
her  functions,  the  undersigned,  in  behalf  as  aforesaid, 
makes  his  solemn  protest  to  your  Excellency  against 
said  *  General  Orders,*  acknowledges  no  authority  in 
them,  and  claims  in  equity  and  Constitutional  law 
that  they  be  rescinded." 

Dr.  Fulton  seems  to  imply  that  the  letter  to  the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   191 

President  eventually  produced  the  revocation  of  the 
"Order."  But  it  was  not  until  January  1,  18G6,  that 
the  Bishop  had  received  assurance  that  the  order  would 
be  revoked,  and  a  few  days  later  he  received  notice  of 
its  actual  revocation.^  He  thereupon,  January  13, 
notified  his  clergy  to  use  the  prayer  for  the  President 
of  the  United  States.  But  for  the  unjustifiable  inter- 
ference of  the  military  power  he  would  have  given 
that  direction  two  months  earlier,  as  soon  as  he  had 
been  able  to  confer  with  his  brethren  at  the  final 
Council  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States, 
held  in  Augusta,  November  8-10,  1865.  Thus  Bishop 
Wilmer  had  faithfully  maintained  his  position,  and 
"the  Diocese  of  Alabama  had  not  been  frightened 
from  her  propriety  by  the  dictate  or  menace  of  any 
secular  power,  civil  or  military." 

In  his  final  statement  of  this  whole  affair  to  the 
Diocesan  Convention  of  January  17,  1866,  Bishop 
Wilmer  said:  "Some  day,  when  the  present  excitement 
of  feeling  has  passed  away,  the  point  which  I  have 
taken,  and  the  issue  which  I  have  made,  will  be  vindi- 
cated before  men,  as  it  is  now,  I  verily  believe,  before 
God." 

Unquestionably  he  was  right  in  the  position  which 
he  took,  and  in  the  issue  which  he  made,  as  to  the  right 
of  the  Church  and  of  the  individual  to  resist  the 
attempt  of  the  secular  power  to  interfere  in  a  matter 

1  Dr.  McConncll,  in  his  "History  of  the  Church"  (page  373), 
makes  this  curious  misstatement:  "A  letter  from  the  Bishop  to  Presi- 
dent Lincoln  [sic]  produced  an  immediate  revocation  of  the  Order." 


192  THE    CHURCH 

of  religious  worship.  Bishop  Wilmer,  shut  out  of  his 
churches,  and  all  his  clergy  silenced,  and  yet  manfully 
contending  for  his  rights  under  the  Constitution  and 
laws  of  the  country,  and  for  the  proper  liberties  of  the 
Church  of  God,  contrasts  most  favorably  with  the 
House  of  Bishops  in  Philadelphia,  expressing  their 
"fraternal  regrets"  that  he  should  have  asserted  and 
maintained  those  rights  and  liberties.  But  it  is  not 
at  all  clear  that  his  original  position  as  to  the  impro- 
priety of  using  the  prayer  for  the  civil  authority  was 
well  taken.  Indeed,  it  seems  to  have  been  a  most 
mistaken  conclusion,  into  which  he  was  betrayed  by 
the  excitement  of  those  trying  times.  No  other 
Bishop  in  the  South  felt  the  same  way  about  it,  which 
of  itself  raises  a  strong  presumption  against  its  cor- 
rectness; and  a  calm  consideration  of  the  principles 
involved  seems  to  sustain  the  course  approved  by 
all  but  the  Bishop  of  Alabama. 

Bishop  Wilmer  was  an  able  man  and  a  godly  man; 
he  was  also  a  man  of  very  strong  feelings.  Under  the 
difficulties  of  his  situation  he  was  led  to  approach  the 
subject  more  as  an  advocate  than  as  a  judge.  To  his 
Diocesan  Convention  of  1864  he  had  complained,  that 
the  phraseology  of  the  prayer  for  those  in  civil  author- 
ity was  unsatisfactory,  and  not  properly  expressive  of 
what  we  should  ask  for  in  behalf  of  our  rulers.  And 
this  criticism  was  fully  justified.  The  words  of  that 
prayer,  as  they  stand,  and  as  use  has  made  them  famil- 
iar to  us,  and  has  made  them  sound  appropriate  in  our 
ears,  have  really  no  proper  application  to  the  civil 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   193 

authorities  under  our  system  of  government.  In  fact, 
the  prayer  is  taken  from  the  EngUsh  Prayer  Cook. 
Several  clauses  of  the  English  prayer  are  omitted,  and 
the  language  of  so  much  as  is  retained  has  been  slightly 
altered  to  amend  certain  archaisms  of  the  original,  but 
the  essential  character  of  the  prayer  has  not  been  de- 
stroyed or  changed.  Its  whole  thought  and  spirit  have 
relation  to  loyalty  to  a  personal  ruler  whose  authority 
is  inherent  and  life-long.  It  breathes  the  love  and 
allegiance  of  the  subject  to  the  person  of  the  sovereign. 
It  is  not  impossible  to  believe  that  the  personal  char- 
acter of  our  first  President,  Washington,  may  uncon- 
sciously have  influenced  the  minds  of  those  who,  during 
his  presidency,  were  settling  the  forms  of  our  public 
services,  and  may  have  caused  them  to  retain  so  much 
of  this  purely  personal  element  in  the  prayers  for  those 
in  civil  authority,  by  naming  only  the  President  of 
the  United  States  specifically,  and  including  all  others 
in  one  brief  phrase.  The  "Proposed  Book"  of  1785, 
by  simply  referring  to  "all  in  authority,  legislative, 
judicial,  and  executive  in  these  United  States,"  gives 
a  turn  to  the  meaning  much  more  impersonal,  and 
really  more  in  accordance  with  the  altered  conditions 
of  modern,  and  especially  of  republican,  government. 
How^ever  that  may  be,  in  our  use  of  the  prayer,  as  it 
stands  in  our  Prayer  Book,  we  employ  the  words  out 
of  their  true  literal  meaning,  and  adapt  them  to  our 
purpose  as  best  w^e  can,  largely  eliminating  their  per- 
sonal element,  and  making  them  expressive  of  quite 
different  thoughts  and  feelings  from  those  naturally 
14 


194  THE    CHURCH 

and  primarily  belonging  to  them.  So  we  cannot  allow 
the  correctness  of  Bishop  Wilmer's  premise,  that  "the 
words  of  that  prayer  were  selected  with  careful  refer- 
ence to  the  subject  of  the  prayer  —  'All  in  Civil 
Authority.''''  The  w^ords  were  taken,  practically  as 
they  stand,  from  an  English  prayer  framed  upon 
theories  of  government,  and  expressing  feelings  and 
ideas,  quite  different  from  what  our  situation  in  America 
calls  for;  and  they  could  never  have  been  used  in  the 
United  States,  except  by  such  an  accommodation  of 
the  language  as  has  been  above  suggested.  Bishop 
Wilmer  himself  felt  this  when  in  the  very  Pastoral 
under  consideration  he  says:  *'The  Church  uses  the 
*  Prayer  for  the  President '  not  so  much  as  a  person,  as 
an  impersonation  of  the  Civil  Authority." 

But  the  fallacy  in  the  argument  does  not  lie  in  the 
exact  or  inexact  meaning  or  use  of  words.  The  ques- 
tion is:  Shall  the  Church  refuse  to  pray  for  the  Civil 
Authority  because  that  particular  territory  in  which 
the  Church  is  situated  is  held  under  military  rule? 
In  June  and  September,  1865,  Alabama  had  again 
become  a  part  of  the  United  States.  In  recognition 
of  this  fact  Bishop  Wilmer  had  himself  taken  the  oath 
of  allegiance,  and  in  this  very  Pastoral  advises  his 
people  to  do  the  same.  The  United  States  was  a  coun- 
try under  civil  government;  "the  President  of  the 
United  States  and  all  others  in  authority'*  were  exer- 
cising the  functions  of  civil  government.  Grant  that 
a  particular  part  of  its  territory,  Alabama,  for  instance, 
was,    under    some    abnormal    conditions,    denied    the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   195 

benefits  of  civil  government;  grant  that  it  was  wrong- 
fully and  unconstitutionally  denied  those  benefits. 
But,  because  of  this,  shall  the  Church  in  Alabama,  the 
Bishop  and  clergy,  retaliate  and  say:  *'We  will  not 
pray  for  the  civil  authority  until  the  civil  authority 
is  reestablished  here"?  The  President  of  the  United 
States  was  the  head  of  a  civil  government,  though  at 
that  particular  time  he  was  governing  Alabama  by  his 
military  authority.  There  was  all  the  more  need  that 
the  Church  everywhere  should  pray  for  the  civil 
authority,  that  it  might  be  strengthened  and  restored 
to  its  proper  exercise  in  all  parts  of  the  land.  As  in 
every  other  Southern  Diocese,  so  in  Alabama,  the 
Church,  upon  its  own  principles,  should  have  prayed 
for  the  powers  that  be.  Much  as  the  Bishop  of  Ala- 
bama is  to  be  revered  and  loved  for  his  noble  qualities 
of  mind  and  of  heart,  much  as  he  is  to  be  respected  for 
his  brave  and  determined  assertion  and  maintenance 
of  the  proper  liberties  of  the  Church,  we  cannot  say 
that  all  the  other  Southern  Bishops  were  wrong,  and 
that  he  was  right,  in  this  point  on  which  he  and  they 
differed. 

And  in  conclusion,  as  to  this  painful  but,  in  some 
respects,  interesting,  question.  Bishop  Wilmer,  in 
saying  that  it  was  not  for  him  in  his  "individual 
capacity  to  introduce  into  the  Liturgy  any  other  form 
of  words  than  that  which  the  Church,  in  her  collective 
and  legislative  capacity,  has  already  established,"  seems 
to  have  forgotten  that  in  his  Episcopal  capacity  it 
was  quite  within  his  power  to  provide  a  prayer  to  be 


196  THE    CHURCH 

used  in  any  emergency  for  which  provision  is  not  made 
in  the  Prayer  Book.  He  had  put  out  special  prayers  to 
be  used  during  the  War.  If  he  now  found  the  prayers 
for  all  in  Civil  Authority  unsuitable,  he  might  have 
put  out  prayers  to  be  used  in  the  churches  of  his  Dio- 
cese, for  the  President  of  the  United  States,  in  such 
form  as  seemed  to  him  most  fit.  Even  if  such  prayers 
had  not  satisfied  the  ecclesiastico-military  potentates 
of  the  Military  District  of  Alabama,  they  would  at 
least  have  been  more  consistent  with  Bishop  Wilmer's 
declared  position,  than  to  have  omitted  all  public 
prayers  for  those  in  authority  at  a  time  when  they 
had  special  need  of  the  prayers  of  all  good  people. 

It  has  been  asserted  by  some  that  the  course  of  the 
Bishop  of  Alabama  was  strictly  in  accordance  with  his 
understanding  of  the  canons  and  rubrics  of  the  Church, 
which  he  felt  bound  to  obey;  and  that,  while  he  might 
have  issued  special  prayers  for  the  authorities  of  the 
United  States,  he  was  under  no  obligation  to  do  so. 
Tb  sustain  this  position  it  is  pointed  out  that,  though 
the  Confederate  States  no  longer  existed,  the  Church 
in  the  Confederate  States  retained  its  organization, 
and  in  the  summer  of  1865  no  one  could  certainly  know 
that  it  would  not  continue  as  a  separate  and  indepen- 
dent Church.  That  Church  had  imposed  a  prayer  for 
the  President  of  the  Confederate  States  and  had  not 
provided  for  any  other;  and,  until  that  Church  should 
authorize  another  prayer,  the  Bishop  of  Alabama 
might  well  feel  that  he  could  not  allow  the  President 
of  the  United  States  to  be  prayed  for  by  his  clergy. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   197 

This  argument  will  not  bear  examination  when  it  is 
alleged  in  behalf  of  Bishop  Wilmer;  and  for  tliis 
reason:  In  March,  1862,  when  the  Rev.  Richard  H. 
Wilmer  was  consecrated  Bishop  of  Alabama,  he  had 
been,  up  to  his  Consecration,  a  Priest  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  Diocese  of  Virginia.  The 
State  of  Virginia,  in  May,  1861,  had  seceded  from  the 
Federal  Union.  But  the  Diocese  of  Virginia  took  no 
action  to  withdraw  from  the  Church  in  the  United 
States  until  May,  1862.  Her  delegates,  appointed  to 
confer  with  other  Southern  Dioceses,  had  agreed  that 
a  separate  organization  was  necessary,  and  had  agreed 
upon  a  new  organization;  but  the  proposed  Constitu- 
tion had  not  been  adopted  by  the  Diocese  of  Virginia, 
nor  by  any  Southern  Diocese,  and  no  change  had  been 
made  in  the  Prayer  Book,  nor  w^as  any  change  made 
until  November,  1862.  Yet  from  the  spring  of  1861 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Wilmer  had  not  only  ceased  using  the 
prayer  for  the  President  of  the  United  States,  but, 
from  the  time  of  the  accession  of  the  State  of  Virginia 
to  the  Confederate  States,  he  and  all  the  clergy  of  the 
Diocese  of  Virginia  had  used  the  prayer  for  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  Confederate  States,  upon  the  ground  that 
it  was  their  duty  to  pray  for  "the  powers  that  be." 
Bishop  Meade  had  authorized  the  use  of  the  Prayer 
for  the  President  of  the  Confederate  States  upon  this 
principle,  as  had  ail  the  other  Southern  Bishops;  and 
we  do  not  understand  that  Dr.  Wilmer  had  objected 
to  it.  Therefore,  when  in  the  summer  of  1865  the 
Bishop  of  Alabama,  by  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance 


198  THE    CHURCH 

to  the  United  States,  and  by  recommending  his  people 
to  do  the  same,  had  recognized  the  restored  authority 
of  the  United  States  government,  there  was  exactly 
the  same  reason  for  using  the  prayer  for  the  President 
of  the  United  States  that  there  had  been  for  praying  for 
the  President  of  the  Confederate  States  in  1861.  He 
did  not  think  it  necessary  in  1861  to  wait  until  the 
Church  had  legislated  for  the  change  of  the  Prayer 
Book;  there  can  be  no  valid  reason  assigned  why  in 
1865  it  was  necessary  to  wait  for  such  change.  In  the 
first  case  the  authority  of  the  Bishop,  acting  under 
the  necessity  of  the  situation,  had  been  sufficient;  the 
same  authority  was  quite  sufficient  in  1865.  It  was 
found  to  be  so  in  all  the  other  Southern  Dioceses; 
there  is  no  reason  why  it  was  not  the  same  in  Alabama. 
In  most  of  the  Southern  Dioceses  the  prayer  for  the 
President  of  the  United  States  was  resumed  without 
any  special  action,  so  soon  as  it  was  realized  that  all 
hope  of  Southern  independence  had  departed.  But 
the  Bishop  of  Virginia  has,  in  his  Address  to  his  Coun- 
cil, September  20,  1865,  recorded  his  action  in  the 
case  mth  his  reasons  for  same.  He  says:  "As 
soon  as  I  received  reliable  intelligence  of  the  entire 
failure  of  the  painful  and  protracted  struggle  for  the 
independence  of  the  Confederate  States,  and  the 
reestablishment  of  the  Federal  authority,  I  felt  it 
incumbent  upon  me  to  prepare  a  brief  circular,  ad- 
dressed to  the  Clergy  and  Laity  of  the  Diocese  of  Vir- 
ginia, recognizing  the  duty  of  prompt  and  honest 
obedience  to  the  existing  government,  and  the  obHga- 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   199 

tion  to  pniy  for  'those  in  authority.'  For  this  pur- 
pose, I  had  no  hesitation  in  recommending  the  use  of 
that  form  to  which  we  had  long  been  accustomed,  and 
from  which  any  deviation  now  might  be  Hable  to  the 
suspicion  of  unbecoming  subterfuge. 

"Whatever  be  the  character  of  the  mihtary  agencies 
appointed  in  certain  locahties,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
in  reference  to  the  President  of  the  United  States  and 
other  Civil  officers  of  the  General  Government. 
They  are  unquestionably  'in  authority.'  To  them  the 
prayer  is  strictly  applicable,  and  for  them  it  should  be 
offered,  even  by  those  who  scruple  to  use  it  on  behalf 
of  others. 

"It  has  been  gravely  asserted,  that  the  order  pro- 
hibiting the  omission  of  that  prayer  in  our  public 
worship  is  an  invasion  of  our  religious  liberty,  and  as 
such  should  not  be  regarded.  I  am  happy  to  say  that 
my  own  action,  though  delayed  in  its  transmission  to 
many  of  the  parishes,  by  the  interruption  of  all  mail 
communication,  antedated  any  extra-ecclesiastical  or- 
der concerning  the  prayer.  I  was,  therefore,  at  the 
time  under  no  apprehension  of  even  seeming  to  sur- 
render religious  liberty  to  what  has  been  pronounced 
unlawful  dictation.  Truth  and  justice,  how^ever,  re- 
quire me  now  to  say,  that  w^hether  that  requisition 
was  advisable  or  not,  I  cannot  see  that  it  is  justly 
liable  to  any  such  odious  charge.  The  prayer,  which 
includes  nothing  to  which  an  enlightened  conscience 
need  take  exception,  is  not  a  new^  form  prepared  and 
enjoined  upon  us  by  'the  powers  that  be,'  but  our  own 


200  THE    CHURCH 

adopted  form,  which  has  been  used  by  the  Church  for 
three  quarters  of  a  century.  Its  discontinuance  at 
this  particular  juncture  would  inevitably  be  regarded 
as  a  public  reflection  on  the  civil  authority.  That  it 
should  insist,  as  it  has  done,  that  no  such  offensive 
change  in  the  service  of  the  Church  shall  now^  be  made, 
but  that  those  services  shall  in  this  respect  and  for  this 
reason  be  conducted  as  heretofore,  avoiding  any  omis- 
sion Vvhich  would  be  considered  a  formal  slight  and 
indignity  offered  to  the  government,  appears  to  me 
rather  an  act  of  self-protection  than  oflScious  and 
unla^^ul  dictation. 

"Even  if  the  requisition  were  an  unlawful  interfer- 
ence, I  see  not  how  this  could  absolve  us  from  that 
which  is  in  itself,  and  independently  of  the  action  of 
others,  a  clear  duty  expressly  enjoined  in  Scripture. 
It  may  be  humiliating  and  painful  in  practice,  but  not 
more  so  than  other  mortifications  of  flesh  and  spirit, 
which  are  not,  therefore,  less  obligatory  —  less  salu- 
tary or  less  acceptable  in  the  sight  of  God.  I  trust, 
then,  we  wall  not  be  disturbed  by  other  opinions,  which, 
however  plausibly  presented,  I  must  disapprove  as 
fallacious,  or  suffer  ourselves  to  be  deterred  from  a 
clear  duty  by  the  imputation  of  surrendering  to  mili- 
tary authority  our  precious  heritage  of  religious 
liberty." 

Such  is  the  argument  of  Bishop  Johns.  To  the 
present  writer  it  seems  most  fallacious.  If  the  civil 
or  military  authority  can  rightfully  order  a  prayer  to 
be  used,  it  can  enforce  the  order;    and  then  General 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   201 

Thomas's  action  was  justifiable  in  closing  all  the 
churches  of  the  Diocese  of  Alabama,  and  suspending 
the  Bishop  and  his  clergy  from  the  exercise  of  their 
function,  and  requiring  them  to  apply  at  military 
headquarters,  through  the  ordinary  military  channels, 
for  permission  to  minister  the  Word  and  Sacraments 
of  God!  Bishop  Wilmer  was  wrong  in  refusing  to 
pray  for  "the  powers  that  be,"  but  he  was  right  when 
he  refused  to  regulate  the  services  of  his  Diocese  in 
accordance  with  a  military  order.  Bishop  Johns  was 
right  in  requiring  his  clergy  to  pray  for  the  President 
of  the  United  States,  just  as  soon  as  he  felt  certain  of 
the  permanent  establishment  of  the  authority  of  the 
Federal  government;  but  he  is  clearly  wrong  when 
he  reasons  from  the  fact  of  his  duty  to  the  right  of 
either  the  military  or  the  civil  authority  to  prescribe 
the  performance  of  a  purely  spiritual  act.  Such  an 
attempted  prescription  is  in  violation  of  a  fundamental 
principle  of  our  civil  Constitution,  and  should  not  be 
tolerated  by  the  Church. 


VII 

PEACE,  AND  THE  REUNION  OF  THE  DIOCESES 

"Peace  hath  its  victories  no  less  renowned  than 
war."  It  is  one  of  the  highest  honors  of  the  Southern 
soldier  that,  when  he  had  laid  down  his  arms  in  1865, 
he  went  back  to  his  home,  or  what  was  left  of  it,  and 
never  thought  again  of  taking  them  up.  He  revered 
the  character  and  followed  the  example  of  his  noble 
leader,  General  Lee,  who  spent  the  rest  of  his  life 
teaching  the  arts  of  peace,  and  instilling  into  the 
young  men  of  the  South  lessons  of  peace  and  of 
patriotism. 

And  in  studying  the  brief  history  of  the  Church  in 
the  Confederate  States  we  cannot  but  be  proud  and 
thanlvful  that,  when  the  War  ceased,  the  separation 
caused  by  the  War  ceased  with  it.  The  Church  of 
Christ  showed  then  the  spirit  of  Christ,  and  at  once 
put  behind  it  all  wrath,  bitterness,  anger,  and  the 
memory  of  wrongs  done  or  suffered,  and,  making  no 
terms  or  conditions  on  either  side,  but  with  sole  reli- 
ance upon  the  love  and  honor  which  should  be  between 
brethren,  closed  the  breach,  and  was  again  one  in  heart 
and  mind,  and  in  that  visible  unity  which  witnessed 
to  men  their  Oneness  in  Christ. 

And  that  the  reality  of  that  vital  Unity,  which  thus 
asserted  itself  in  the  life  of  the  Church,  and  which  was 

202 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   203 

truly  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  and  not  the  contrivance 
or  achievement  of  man,  may  clearly  appear,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  mark  somewhat  distinctly  the  human  elements 
of  strife  and  discord  which  entered  into  the  problem, 
as  men  saw  it,  at  the  close  of  hostilities  in  the  spring 
of  1865. 

The  first  important  step  towards  reconciliation  and 
reunion  was  properly  taken  by  the  Presiding  Bishop^ 
of  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  In  God's  good 
providence  his  personal  relations  with  the  Southern 
Bishops,  and  his  known  attitude  towards  some  of  the 
vexed  questions  of  the  day,  assured  him  of  a  favorable 
hearing  in  any  proposition  he  might  make.  He  ad- 
dressed to  each  of  the  Southern  Bishops  an  affectionate 
letter,  inviting  and  urging  them  to  come  and  take  their 
accustomed  places  in  the  General  Convention,  which 
was  to  meet  in  Philadelphia  on  the  fourth  day  of  the 
month  of  October. 

This  letter  was  dated  July  12,  1865,  and  contains 
among  other  things  the  following  passages,  quoted  once 
and  again  throughout  the  Southern  Church  during 
the  next  few  critical  months: 

"I  consider  it  a  duty  especially  incumbent  on  me, 
as  the  Presiding  Bishop,  to  testify  my  affectionate 
attachment  to  those  amongst  my  colleagues  from  whom 
I  have  been  separated  during  those  years  of  suffering 
and  calamity;  and  to  assure  you  personally  of  the 
cordial  welcome  which  awaits  you  at  our  approaching 
General  Convention.  In  this  assurance,  however,  I 
^  The  Rt.  Rev.  John  Ilcnry  Hopkins,  Bishop  of  Vermont. 


204  THE    CHURCH 

pray  you  to  believe  that  I  do  not  stand  alone.  I  have 
corresponded  on  the  subject  with  the  Bishops,  and 
think  myself  authorized  to  state  that  they  sympathize 
with  me  generally  in  the  desire  to  see  the  fullest  repre- 
sentation of  churches  from  the  South,  and  to  greet 
their  brethren  in  the  Episcopate  with  the  kindest 
feelings. 

"The  past  cannot  be  recalled,  and  though  it  may 
not  soon  be  forgotten,  yet  it  is  the  part  of  Christian 
wisdom  to  bury  it  forever,  rather  than  to  suffer  it  to 
interfere  with  the  present  and  the  future  interests  of 
unity  and  peace. 

"I  trust  therefore  that  I  shall  enjoy  the  precious 
gratification  of  seeing  you  and  your  delegates  in 
proper  place  at  the  regular  triennial  meeting." 

Of  course,  the  one  chief  difficulty  in  all  such  cases  is 
the  different  point  of  view.  The  case  of  Bishop  Polk 
would  have  constituted  an  all  but  insurmountable 
obstacle  in  the  path,  but  that  difficulty  had  been  provi- 
dentially removed.  Still,  in  the  North,  that  remained 
a  very  real  and  serious  embarrassment.  Then  there 
w^as  the  case  of  the  Consecration  of  Bishop  Wilmer 
and  of  the  erection  of  Arkansas  into  a  Diocese.  These 
two,  however,  were  felt  to  be  mainly  technical.  The 
real  difficulty  on  that  side  lay  in  the  fact  that  North- 
ern Churchmen  had  got  into  the  habit  of  speaking, 
and  perhaps  thinking,  of  the  separation  as  in  some 
w^ay  schismatical.  Bishop  Wilmer's  Consecration  was 
spoken  of  as  a  schismatical  Consecration,  and  the  whole 
attitude  of  the  Southern  Church  seemed  to  Southern 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   205 

Churchmen  to  be  misapprehended  and  misrepresented 
at  the  North.  The  General  Convention  of  18G2  had 
wisely  rejected  the  several  resolutions  proposed  by  the 
more  radical  members,  in  which  Southern  Churchmen 
were  denounced  as  seditious  and  schismatical,  and  had 
adopted  instead  resolutions  of  a  comparatively  mod- 
erate and  generous  character.  But  the  rejected  reso- 
lutions were  understood  to  represent  the  views  of  many 
influential  men  in  the  Church;  and  it  was  well  known 
that  many  of  those,  who  in  1862  had  most  earnestly 
opposed  such  injurious  reflections  upon  their  absent 
brethren,  had  based  their  objection  upon  the  fact  of 
absence,  and  the  want  of  any  evidence  before  the  Con- 
vention, except  public  rumor  and  hearsay,  upon  the 
questions  involved.  It  seemed  universally  taken  for 
granted  in  that  Convention  that,  if  the  Southern 
Dioceses  had  presumed  to  recognize  the  authority  of 
the  Confederate  government,  and  to  organize  the 
Church  upon  the  theory  of  a  permanent  new  nation- 
ality, they  would  deserve  the  worst  that  could  be  said 
of  them.  The  comparatively  moderate  and,  on  the 
whole,  kindly  resolutions  finally  adopted,  while  they 
endeavored  to  avoid  intruding  into  politics,  were  yet 
framed  upon  the  theory  that  Southern  Churchmen, 
as  Churchmen,  owed  a  sacred  allegiance  to  that  inter- 
pretation of  the  Constitution  which  the  North  had 
espoused.  It  did  not  seem  to  have  entered  into  the 
minds  of  the  members  of  that  Convention  that, 
without  reference  to  the  merits  or  demerits  of  the 
Southern  cause,  it  was  not  only  a  matter  of  necessity. 


206  THE    CHURCH 

but  of  duty  as  well,  that  the  Church,  in  the  presence 
of  an  organized  civil  government,  should  eschew  party 
strife  and  submit  to  "the  powers  that  be";  and  that 
separation  thus  caused  could  not  justly  be  called  schism. 
These  things  had  not  been  forgotten  in  the  South,  nor 
could  they  be  ignored.  Even  the  loving  letter  of 
Bishop  Hopkins  already  quoted,  which  did  so  much 
to  prepare  the  way  for  a  better  mutual  understanding 
and  the  happiness  of  a  perfect  reconciliation,  did  not 
escape  this  error.  He  spoke  of  the  continuance  of  the 
separate  organization  of  the  Southern  Dioceses  as  being 
necessarily  a  schism.  His  affectionate  and  earnest 
entreaties  and  warnings  were  against  making  a  schism 
in  the  Body. 

Southern  Churchmen  indignantly  repudiated  the 
charge  of  schism.  They  rightly  repelled  the  word  and 
the  thought  when  applied  in  any  way  to  their  action 
past  or  in  prospect.  They  pointed  out  that  schism 
has  to  do  with  the  unity  of  the  Church  as  expressed, 
not  in  legislative  organization,  but  in  the  union  and 
fellowship  of  the  members  in  the  One  Body;  and  they 
claimed  that  they  had  made  no  breach  in  that  unity 
of  faith  and  fellowship.  They  had  only  recognized 
the  facts  of  their  situation,  and  in  the  disruption  of 
political  connections  which  actually  had  existed,  and 
which  they  had  believed  to  be  both  necessary  and 
permanent,  they  had  acted  as  the  situation  seemed  to 
require  for  the  life  of  the  Church.  They  had  been 
wrong  in  their  estimate  of  the  permanence  of  the 
separation,  but  no  one  could  doubt  the  perfect  honesty 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   207 

and  sincerity  of  their  course.  And  in  the  very  act  of 
effecting  their  separate  organization  they  had  pro- 
tested, in  the  most  solemn  manner,  that  they  had  done, 
and  would  do,  nothing  which  should  break  the  fellow- 
ship of  faith  and  love  with  their  Northern  brethren. 
They  pointed  with  confidence  to  the  record  of  their 
proceedings  and  to  the  Pastoral  Letter  of  their  Bishops, 
published  when  the  War  was  raging  most  fiercely,  and 
they  defied  the  eye  of  malice  to  discover  in  them  any 
trace  of  a  schismatical  mind  or  spirit.  And  having,  as 
they  believed,  been  providentially  forced  into  a  sepa- 
rate organization,  they  felt  now  that  as  Christian  men, 
clergy  and  laity,  in  an  organized  branch  of  the  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Church,  they  had  a  right  to  consider 
and  to  determine  what  course  they  should  take  for  the 
future,  freely  and  fully,  and  undeterred  by  any  cry 
of  schism.  The  eloquent  Bishop  of  Virginia  put  the 
case  as  to  the  charge  of  schism  most  admirably  to  his 
Council  of  September  20,  1865: 

"The  separation  of  the  Southern  Dioceses  from  the 
organization  with  which  they  were  happily  connected, 
w^as  occasioned  not  by  any  disagreement  in  doctrine 
or  discipline,  or  manner  of  w^orship,  but  by  political 
changes,  which  rendered  the  continuance  of  that  con- 
nection impracticable.  The  preservation  of  the  order 
and  purity  of  the  Church,  in  this  section  of  the  country, 
called  for  a  separate  organization,  which  was  accord- 
ingly effected  with  a  careful  avoidance  of  any  altera- 
tion which  could  impair  that  unity  of  spirit  which  our 
holy  religion  enjoins.     'The  exigency  of  the  necessity' 


208  THE    CHURCH 

furnished  the  divine  commission  under  which  this  asso- 
ciation was  formed,  and  constitutes  a  divine  sanction 
for  its  continuance,  unless  good  and  sufficient  reasons 
to  the  contrary  are  manifest.  The  mere  cessation  of 
the  causes  in  which  it  originated  does  not,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  dissolve  it,  and  restore  the  relations  which 
previously  existed.  .  .  .  Under  these  circumstances, 
it  could  not,  on  any  principle  of  reason  or  revelation, 
be  regarded  as  justly  liable  to  the  imputation  of  schism, 
which  is  'a  causeless  separation  from  the  external 
communion  of  any  church.'  Our  organization  was  no 
breach  of  communion,  and  for  the  external  separation 
which  it  formed  there  was  obvious  and  ample  cause." 
To  Bishop  Hopkins,  who,  as  we  have  seen,  had  in- 
vited the  Southern  Dioceses  to  return  at  once  to  their 
old  relations  with  the  Church  in  the  United  States, 
and  had  urged  that  to  continue  their  separate  organ- 
ization would  be  to  create  a  schism,  the  Bishop  of 
Alabama  replied  in  a  published  letter.  In  the  first 
place  he  affirmed  that,  "Schism,  as  defined  by  the 
standard  authorities,  has  reference  primarily  to  the 
rending  of  communion,  and  cannot  be  truly  predicated 
of  branches  of  the  Church  of  Christ  which  maintain 
intercommunion."  In  illustration  he  cited  the  case  of 
the  Churches  of  England,  Scotland,  the  United  States, 
and  Canada,  and  the  relations  existing  between  them. 
He  urged  various  arguments  in  favor  of  delay,  in  order 
that  time  might  heal  the  many  wounds  caused  by  the 
War;  and  he  maintained  that  the  spirit  manifested  by 
many  Northern  Churchmen  justified  the  apprehension. 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES 

that  terms  of  reconciliation  might  be  imposed,  if  too 
speedy  advances  to  reunion  were  made,  which  South- 
ern Churchmen  could  not  accept.  One  argument  ad- 
vanced by  him  must  at  that  time  have  been  most 
effective,  and  all  but  convincing.  He  called  attention 
to  the  fact  that  the  class  of  laymen  in  the  South,  from 
among  whom  the  lay  deputies  to  General  Convention 
had  always  been  chosen,  were,  almost  without  excep- 
tion, men  who  by  the  United  States  government  were 
excluded  from  the  general  amnesty  proclaimed  at  the 
end  of  the  War;  and  that  those  classes  had  recently 
been  declared  by  the  President  to  be  "unpardoned 
rebels  and  traitors."  Since  the  General  Convention 
of  1862  had  felt  it  to  be  the  duty  of  the  Church  to  sup- 
port the  government,  how  could  the  Southern  Dioceses 
feel  any  confidence  that  their  lay  deputies  to  the  Gen- 
eral Convention  of  1865  would  be  received  as  such.'^^ 
Those  who  do  not  remember  the  experiences  of  those 
days  cannot  appreciate  the  force  which  such  an  argu- 
ment carried.  There  was  little  desire  in  the  South 
among  Churchmen  to  perpetuate  division,  and  to  add 

^  The  four  lay  deputies  chosen  to  represent  the  Diocese  of  North 
CaroUna  at  the  General  Convention  in  Philadelphia,  October  1865, 
all  belonged  to  the  classes  excluded  from  amnesty,  though  one  of 
them  had  been  able  to  have  his  disabilities  removed. 

It  would  probably  have  been  impossible  to  find  four  laymen,  in 
any  Southern  Diocesan  Convention,  at  all  competent  to  represent  the 
Diocese  in  the  General  Convention,  who  did  not  belong  to  the  classes 
excluded  from  amnesty. 

The  late  Governor  Thomas  H.  Seymour,  of  Connecticut,  told  the 
writer  that,  being  at  Chapel  Hill,  in  June,  1868,  to  deliver  the  Com- 
mencement Oration  before  the  University  of  North  Carolina,  he 
15 


210  THE    CHURCH 

another  broken  fragment  to  the  already  too  numerous 
divisions  of  Christendom;  but  there  was  a  very  serious 
apprehension  lest  too  great  haste  might  occasion  morti- 
fying and  injurious  rebuffs.  For  these  reasons  Bishop 
Wilmer  felt  bound  to  decline  the  invitation  of  the 
Presiding  Bishop.  The  Bishop  of  Alabama  was  a  strong 
and  eloquent  writer,  and  his  letter  to  Bishop  Hopkins 
was  the  more  influential  in  the  South  from  the  fact  that 
the  Bishop  of  Mississippi,  one  of  the  mildest  and  sweet- 
est natures  in  all  the  Church,  North  or  South,  appended 
his  signature  to  it,  with  a  line  to  say  that  he  entirely 
agreed  in  its  arguments  and  conclusions.  In  the 
summer  of  1865  the  people  of  the  South  could  not  feel 
sure  of  the  state  of  feeling  in  the  North  towards  any 
sectional  matter.^ 

Diocesan  Councils  had  been  held  during  the  month 
of  May,  1865,  in  Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Georgia, 

dined  with  a  distinguished  company  of  gentlemen,  including  among 
others  the  Hon.  Thomas  Ruffin,  former  Chief -Justice  of  North 
Carolina  and  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  American  lawyers,  the  Hon. 
Wm,  A.  Graham,  who  had  been  Governor,  Senator,  Secretary  of  the 
Navy,  and  Whig  candidate  for  Vice-President,  Ex-Governor  Swain, 
President  of  the  University,  the  Hon.  Wm.  H.  Battle,  of  the  State 
Supreme  Court,  and  Ex-Governor  Zebulon  B.  Vance.  He  was 
told,  as  an  illustration  of  the  unnatural  condition  of  public  affairs 
in  the  South,  that  under  the  Reconstruction  Acts,  which  had  just 
gone  into  effect,  the  only  'persons  in  the  room  who  could  vote  were  the 
two  negro  men  who  waited  upon  the  table. 

^  The  following  from  "The  Life  of  Bishop  Hopkins"  may  serve  to 
illustrate  the  feeling  expressed  in  Bishop  Wilmer's  letter.  "On  the 
6th  of  May,  1865,  three  weeks  after  General  Lee's  surrender,  a 
leading  editorial  in  the  Episcopal  Recorder  of  Philadelphia,  then  the 
chief  Low  Church  organ,  demanded  of  the  government  that  some  of 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   211 

but  the  uncertainty  of  the  times  and  the  small  attend- 
ance of  members  had  prevented  any  important  action. 
Nothing  was  done  with  reference  to  reunion:  it  was 
then  too  soon  for  the  question  to  be  considered.  But 
Bishop  Hopkins  Iiad  opened  the  question  by  his  letter 
of  July  12,  and  the  response  of  the  Southern  Bishops, 
even  when  most  adverse,  as  in  the  case  of  Bishop 
Wilmer  and  Bishop  Green,  soon  made  reunion  the  great 
issue  before  the  Church. 

August  11,  an  adjourned  meeting  of  the  Diocesan 
Council  of  Georgia  was  held  in  Emmanuel  Church, 
Athens.  In  his  address  to  this  Council,  Bishop  Elliott 
spoke  out  strongly  upon  the  duty  and  necessity  of 
the  eventual  return  of  the  Diocese  to  its  former  rela- 
tions with  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  He  had 
been  upon  specially  affectionate  and  confidential  rela- 
tions with  Bishop  Hopkins,  and  the  prompt  and 
generous  action  of  the  Presiding  Bishop,  in  addressing 
his  letter  to  his  Southern  brethren,  had  moved  him, 
as  it  had  moved  all  the  Bishops;  and  there  was  no 
uncertain  sound  in  Bishop  Elliott's  strong  presentation 
of  the  importance  of  renewing  the  old  bonds  of  union 

the  leading  Bishops  and  clergy  at  the  South  should  be  hanged,  on  the 
ground  that  they  had  been  leaders  in  the  original  movement  for 
secession.  As  the  General  Convention  was  to  meet  that  same  year, 
in  October,  in  that  same  city  of  Philadelphia,  one  can  easily  see  how 
difficult  it  must  have  been  to  persuade  Southern  Churchmen  that  they 
would  be  welcomed  to  its  sessions  as  brethren."  And  again:  "With 
such  editorials  as  that  of  the  Episcopal  Recorder,  and  the  reprinting 
in  similar  organs,  for  weeks,  of  every  paragraph  that  could  keep  up 
Northern  prejudice  against  Southern  Churchmen,  the  prospect  of 
immediate  success  [in  the  reunion  of  the  Dioceses]  was  not  cheering." 


212  THE    CHURCH 

between  all  parts  of  the  Church.  He  did  not  wish  to 
contemplate  the  prospect  of  permanent  separation. 
But  Bishop  Elliott  was  equally  strong  in  the  expression 
of  his  opposition  to  immediate  action  by  individual 
Southern  Dioceses,  looking  towards  representation  in 
the  approaching  General  Convention.  As  during  the 
continuance  of  the  war  he  had  been  most  free  in 
expressing,  even  from  the  pulpit,  the  national  aspira- 
tions of  the  Southern  people,  so  now  he  embodied  that 
sentiment  of  sensitive  regard  for  the  memories  of  the 
recent  past,  and  that  apprehension  as  to  the  treatment 
which  might  possibly  be  accorded  to  Southern  Church- 
men by  their  Northern  brethren,  which  made  so  many 
good  men  fear  the  effects  of  a  too  precipitate  movement 
for  reunion.  He  said  to  his  Convention  of  August  11, 
1865:  "In  her  action,  under  the  present  condition  of 
affairs,  the  Diocese  of  Georgia  must  remember  that 
she  has  to  act,  not  only  for  herself,  but  also  for  her 
sister  Dioceses,  with  w^hom  she  was  for  a  time  united. 
She  owes  it  to  her  own  character  and  dignity  to  keep 
faith  with  them,  and  to  arrange  a  reunion  which  will 
not  place  any  of  them  in  a  worse  condition  than  it 
may  place  herself.  .  .  .  My  opinion  is  that  the  Coun- 
cil made  up  from  the  Dioceses  in  the  States  which 
seceded,  should  meet  in  November,  .  .  .  and  should 
there  decide  upon  the  course  to  be  pursued.  ...  It 
will  cause  delay  of  a  month  or  two  in  the  adjustment 
of  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  but  better  that  than  a 
hasty  reunion,  which  will  leave  subjects  to  be  discussed 
and  reopened,  which  had  better  not  be  touched  after 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   213 

once  they  have  been  talked  over  and  settled.  It  would 
prevent,  'tis  true,  our  Diocese  from  being  represented 
at  the  next  General  Convention  in  both  Houses,  but 
that  might  be  a  blessing,  when  wounds  are  so  recent, 
and  when  topics  connected  with  the  exciting  subjects 
of  the  conflict  of  the  last  four  years  must  necessarily 
come  up  for  consideration.  After  such  years  of  strife, 
there  must  be  some  readjustment,  which  had  better 
take  place  while  our  Dioceses  are  not  represented  in 
the  General  Convention.  It  would  allow  that  body  a 
much  freer  scope  for  discussion,  and  might  save  us 
much  pain  and  irritation."  ^ 

It  is  quite  plain  from  this  that  Bishop  Elliott  was 
not  at  all  prepared  to  consider  immediate  reunion. 
Much  about  this  same  time  he  addressed  a  letter  to 
the  Editor  of  The  Church  Journal^  of  New  York,  taking 
the  same  ground,  in  favor  of  postponing  the  move- 
ment for  reunion,  upon  even  more  distinct  and  specific 
suggestions  of  the  mortifying  experiences  to  be  appre- 
hended   by   Southern   Churchmen,   who   should   thus 

^  Bishop  Elliott  at  this  time  seemed  disposed  to  take  a  position 
similar  to  that  of  Bishop  Wilmer,  and  to  postpone  ecclesiastical 
reunion  until  the  Southern  States  had  been  restored  to  their  proper 
civil  status.  His  words,  in  this  same  address,  are:  "The  Diocese  of 
Georgia  will,  therefore,  as  soon  as  her  civil  Government  is  restored,  be 
in  a  condition  in  which,  as  I  said  before,  there  will  be  no  political  or 
canonical  hindrance  to  her  reunion  with  the  Dioceses  with  which  for 
so  many  years,  she  acted  in  harmony  and  peace."  But  in  using  this 
language  he  probably  assumed,  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  speedy 
restoration  of  civil  and  political  relations  between  all  the  States  of 
the  Union,  and  had  not  contemplated  the  possibility  of  any  alterna- 
tive. He  probably  meant  simply  to  indicate  a  time,  not  to  suggest 
a  condition,  of  returning. 


214  THE    CHURCH 

venture  to  trust  the  magnanimity  of  their  brethren 
of  the  North,  and  very  openly  reflecting  upon  some 
of  his  Southern  brethren,  who  were  disposed  to  adopt 
the  course  which  he  disapproved.^  His  Council  seemed 
of  a  different  mind,  and  gave  a  much  warmer  and 
more  sympathetic  response  to  the  idea  of  an  early 
restoration  of  the  old  relations;  and  while  declaring 
that  the  Diocese  of  Georgia  was  prepared  to  resume 
those  relations  "whenever  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Bishop  it  shall  be  consistent  with  the  good  faith" 
which  they  owed  to  the  other  Southern  Dioceses 
and  Bishops,  it  took  care  to  provide  that  the  dele- 
gates elected  to  the  Council  of  the  Southern  Church, 
should  be  authorized  also  to  represent  the  Diocese  in 
the  General  Convention  at  Philadelphia,  "if  any 
contingencies  should  arise  whereby  it  should  become 
expedient"  that  the  Diocese  should  be  represented  in 
that  Convention. 

The  first  strong  and  unequivocal  word  in  behalf  of 
prompt  and  unhesitating  reunion,  after  the  action  of 
the  Diocese  of  Texas  the  middle  of  June,  seems  to  have 
come  from  North  Carolina.  Bishop  Atkinson  about 
this  time  took  up  the  matter  with  a  clearness  of  view 
and  distinctiveness  of  utterance  characteristic  of  him. 

1  Bishop  Gregg  felt  himself  and  his  Diocese  so  closely  touched  by 
these  reflections  of  the  Bishop  of  Georgia,  that  he  replied  in  an  open 
letter  addressed  to  Bishop  Elliott,  through  the  columns  of  the  Church 
Intelligencer.  There  are  few  finer  specimens  of  clear  and  cogent 
reasoning,  manly  dignity,  and  sweet  Christian  courtesy,  than  in  this 
letter  of  Bishop  Gregg  to  one  whom  he  loved  and  revered,  but  in  this 
case  could  not  follow. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   215 

The  fortunes  of  war  had  left  liis  kinsman,  Bishop  Lay, 
stranded,  so  to  speak,  in  the  little  town  of  Lincolnton, 
N.C.  Bishop  Lay  had  in  1861  resigned  to  Bishop 
Brownell  his  jurisdiction  as  a  Missionary  Bishop  of 
the  Church  in  the  United  States,  and  had  been  elected 
Bishop  of  the  Diocese  of  Arkansas,  upon  its  organiza- 
tion under  the  Constitution  and  Canons  of  the  Church 
of  the  Confederate  States  in  November,  1862.  The 
return  of  the  Southern  Dioceses  into  union  with  the 
Church  in  the  United  States,  a  very  simple  matter  in 
the  case  of  the  other  Southern  Bishops,  was  to  him  a 
question  of  very  grave  complications,  since  his  Diocese 
had  been  practically  wiped  out  of  existence  by  the 
destructive  ravages  of  war,  and  he  had  resigned  his 
work  as  Missionary  Bishop.  His  status  in  the  Church, 
upon  the  accomplishment  of  reunion,  promised  to  give 
more  ground  for  doubt  and  contention  than  even  the 
Consecration  of  Bishop  Wilmer.  But  he  cared  not 
to  consider  any  mere  personal  aspects  of  so  great  a 
question,  and  readily  joined  Bishop  Atkinson  in  a  letter 
to  Bishop  Elliott,  Presiding  Bishop  of  the  Church 
in  the  Confederate  States,  expressing  their  "decided 
opinion,"  that  "considerations  of  principle,  and  of 
expediency  as  well,  require  us  to  restore  the  ecclesi- 
astical relations  which  existed  before  the  war."  To 
this  letter  Bishop  Elliott  replied,  saying  that  he  did 
"not  see  how  we  can  avoid  returning  into  connection 
with  the  Church  in  the  Union."  This  reply,  however, 
must  be  interpreted  in  accordance  with  Bishop  Elliott's 
plainly  expressed  purpose  of  postponing  action  until 


216  THE    CHURCH 

after  the  General  Council  appointed  to  meet  Novem- 
ber 8.  But  as  that  would  be  the  month  following  the 
meeting  of  the  General  Convention  in  Philadelphia, 
and  as  it  was  most  desirable  that  there  should  be  some 
consultation  and  concert  of  action  among  the  Bishops 
with  reference  to  the  General  Convention,  Bishop 
Elliott,  as  Presiding  Bishop,  agreed  to  call  together 
the  Bishops  of  the  South  for  mutual  counsel  and  advice 
before  the  meeting  of  the  Council.  The  date  and 
place  appointed  by  him  were  September  27,  1865,  at 
Augusta,  Georgia. 

This  then  was  the  situation  in  the  South  at  the  end 
of  the  summer  of  1865,  as  the  time  for  the  meeting  of 
the  General  Convention  drew  near.  Distant  Texas 
had  by  the  middle  of  June  gone  back  to  its  old  position, 
without  hesitation  or  suggestion  of  condition.  But 
Texas  was  not  only  distant,  far  removed  from  sym- 
pathetic contact  with  the  rest  of  the  Southern  Dioceses, 
but  it  was  little  more  than  a  Missionary  District, 
which  had  hardly  had  a  Bishop  in  the  General  Conven- 
tion, and  had  been  wholly  unrepresented  in  the  one 
national  Council  of  the  Southern  Church.  Texas 
counted  for  little  in  making  public  opinion  in  the 
Southern  Church  in  1865.  The  Bishops  of  Georgia, 
Alabama,  and  Mississippi  were  distinctly  opposed  to 
immediate  reunion,  and  took  an  aggressive  attitude  in 
behalf  of  the  policy  of  holding  the  General  Council 
in  November.  It  seemed  that  they  had  not  only  their 
own  Dioceses  behind  them,  in  standing  for  this  policy, 
but  that  they  represented  the  general  sentiment  of  the 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   217 

South.  The  Bishop  of  South  Carolina  was  declaredly 
for  permanent  separation;  and  while  Bishop  Johns, 
as  we  shall  presently  see,  earnestly  desired,  and  most 
eloquently  pleaded  for,  immediate  restoration  of  the 
old  relations,  his  clergy  and  laity  were  against  him, 
and  soon  after,  in  the  meeting  of  their  Council,  Septem- 
ber 20,  gave  emphatic  expression  to  that  opposition. 
Florida,  weak  and  scattered,  even  more  negligible  than 
Texas,  had  given  no  sign  of  diocesan  life  for  a  year  or 
two,  and  exercised  no  influence  upon  the  situation. 
Tennessee  and  Louisiana,  both  deprived  of  their 
Bishops,^  had  been  so  paralyzed  by  the  course  of 
hostilities  that  they  had  been  able  to  assemble  no 
Diocesan  Convention  since  1861,  and  so  had  never 
become  formally  united  with  the  "Church  in  the 
Confederate  States."  In  this  situation  of  affairs  the 
Diocese  of  North  Carolina  met  in  Diocesan  Council 
Wednesday,  September  13,  in  Christ  Church,  Raleigh. 
Among  the  Southern  Bishops  in  1865,  Bishop  Atkin- 
son stood  next  to  Bishop  Elliott  in  personal  distinction, 
power,  and  influence.  With  the  removal  of  Bishop 
Meade,  Bishop  Otey,  and  Bishop  Polk,  these  two, 
Elliott  and  Atkinson,  remained  the  most  notable 
Southern  Bishops  in  the  eyes  and  to  the  minds  of  the 
Church  at  large.  Bishop  Elliott  embodied  the  strong 
national  feeling  of  the  South  developed  by  the  war; 
Bishop  Atkinson  had  all  along  subordinated  every 
local  and  national  feeling  to  his  high  conception  of  the 
freedom  of  the  Church,  and  its  superiority  to  all 
1  Bishop  Otey  had  died  April  23,  1863. 


218  THE    CHURCH 

worldly  interests  and  institutions.  In  1861  he  had 
maintained  boldly,  and  at  the  cost  of  misunder- 
standing and  misrepresentation,  that  the  Church  was 
no  ways  affected  in  its  constitutional  connections  and 
obligations  by  the  civil  and  political  disruption  caused 
by  the  secession  of  the  States;  now  in  1865,  while 
holding  strongly  the  absolute  lawfulness  and  propriety 
of  the  action  of  the  Southern  Dioceses  in  forming  their 
separate  organization,  he  was  equally  emphatic  in 
asserting  that,  the  cause,  and  the  only  cause,  of  separa- 
tion being  removed,  it  was  the  plain  duty  of  the  Diocese 
to  resume  its  former  relations  with  the  Church  in  the 
United  States.  He  repelled  the  suggestion  of  anything 
schismatical  in  the  action  of  the  Church  in  the  Confed- 
erate States,  but  he  so  far  agreed  with  Bishop  Hopkins 
that  he  saw  great  probability  and  imminent  danger  of 
the  development  of  schism,  should  the  Southern  Dio- 
ceses persist  in  maintaining  a  separate  organization, 
after  the  sole  cause,  alleged  by  them  to  justify  the 
separation,  had  ceased  to  exist.  The  organization 
might  not  itself  be  schismatical  in  theory,  but  he  felt 
that  the  spirit  by  which  it  would  be  maintained  would 
be  schismatical,  and  that  the  situation  would  surely, 
unavoidably,  produce  the  worst  practical  fruits  of 
schism.  He  put  the  situation  very  clearly  before  his 
Council:  "We  believe  that  schism  is  a  sin,  as  well  as 
a  source  of  innumerable  and  incalculable  evils.  And 
surely  wilful  separation  from  a  Church,  with  which 
we  have  hitherto  been  in  union,  is  schism,  or  schism 
is  a  very  mysterious  and  impalpable  thing,  a  senti- 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   219 

mental  grief,  not  a  plain  matter  of  fact,  taking  place 
before  the  eyes  of  men.  An  enforced  separation  is 
not  schism,  .  .  .  The  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States  was  not  schismatical  as  to  the  Church  in  the 
United  States,  because  war  and  diversities  of  political 
government  kept  them  apart.  But  when  there  is 
no  war  and  no  diversity  of  political  government, 
then  to  remain  apart,  because  we  cannot  bear  each 
other's  presence,  that  is  schism  and  great  uncharitable- 
ness,  and  so  the  common-sense  of  all  men,  who  believe 
that  there  is  such  a  sin,  will  ultimately  decide. 

"This  is  a  question  which,  it  is  certain,  requires  of 
us  all  of  calm  and  dispassionate  wisdom  that  we  can 
command,  and,  what  is  even  more  important,  a  supreme 
reference  to  the  honor  of  our  Lord  and  the  welfare  of 
His  Church,  making  us  willing  to  sacrifice  to  these 
objects  whatever  tends  merely  to  gratify  our  own  feel- 
ings, or  to  gain  the  favor  of  our  fellow-men.  To  me 
it  is  plain  that  this  is  a  critical  moment  in  the  history 
of  the  Church,  both  at  the  North  and  the  South  — 
that  on  the  decision  it  shall  now  reach  and  the  action 
it  shall  now  pursue,  it  will  depend  very  much  w^hether 
in  the  future  it  shall  sink  to  the  level  of  a  mere  sect,  or 
rather  a  bundle  of  hostile  sects,  or  shall  maintain  its 
claim  to  be  a  pure  and  vigorous  branch  of  the  Church 
Catholic,  rising  continually  into  wider  usefulness  and 
higher  influence,  until  at  length  it  shall  become  the 
Church,  not  merely  in  the  United  States,  but  of  the 
American  people." 

He  did  not  confine  himself  to  the  purely  ecclesiastical 


220  THE    CHURCH 

aspects  of  the  question.  He  was  no  less  a  true  patriot 
than  a  loyal  Churchman.  He  had  a  heart  and  an 
intelligence  responsive  to  the  necessities  of  his  people 
and  his  country.  He  looked  beyond  the  limits  of  the 
immediate  horizon:  "Let  us  then  endeavor  to  forecast 
the  future  as  well  as  we  can,  for  we  are  not  deciding 
any  ephemeral  question.  The  conclusion  to  which  we 
shall  now  come  is  one  in  which  our  children's  children 
have  a  deep  interest  as  well  as  ourselves.  The  authority 
of  the  government  of  the  United  States  is  reestablished 
over  the  South,  and  there  is  a  universal  disclaimer  of 
any  intention  or  desire  to  attempt  to  unsettle  it.  But 
it  is  very  far  from  being  certain  what  the  nature  of 
the  Union  is  to  be  which  has  been  cemented  with  so 
much  blood.  Is  it  to  be  one  of  constraint,  or  one  of 
affection?  Is  the  South  to  be  added  to  the  melancholy 
list  of  oppressed  nationalities  —  to  become  an  American 
Poland  or  Hungary,  to  live  by  the  side  of  the  North 
in  a  state  of  chronic  turbulence,  suspicious  and  sus- 
pected, hating  and  hated?  A  doom  so  mournful  and 
so  humiliating  is  certainly  not  to  be  desired.  Can  it 
be  averted?  To  me  it  seems  very  much  to  depend  on 
the  Ministers  of  Religion.  They  have  a  great  deal  to 
do  in  moulding  the  sentiments  of  a  people.  They  sit 
by  their  firesides  —  they  are  admitted  into  their  most 
confidential  communications.  A  feeling  which  they 
sanction  is,  on  that  account,  much  more  strongly 
believed  to  be  right  and  proper  to  be  cherished,  while 
one  which  they  reprobate  is,  even  if  still  indulged  in, 
thought  to  be  of  a  questionable  nature.  .  .  . 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   221 

"It  is  then  of  cardinal  importance  to  tlie  peace  and 
welfare  of  the  country,  that  there  should  he  a  reunion 
of  the  different  religious  denominations  which  now  have 
distinct  organizations  at  the  North  and  the  South. 
But  I  believe  it  to  be  perfectly  evident  that,  if  this  is 
to  take  place,  it  must  begin  with  the  Episcopal  Church. 
If  that  cannot,  or  will  not,  reunite,  none  can  or  will. 
We  separated  from  the  force  of  outward  circumstances, 
without  discord,  without  crimination  or  recrimination; 
on  the  contrary,  with  the  language  of  love  on  our  lips, 
and,  I  trust  and  believe,  with  the  feeling  of  love  in  our 
hearts.  .  .  . 

*'I  conceive,  therefore,  that  the  best  hopes  of  the 
country,  and  especially  of  the  South,  are  bound  up  in 
the  question,  what  will  the  Episcopal  Church  now  do? 
My  earnest  desire,  then,  and  constant  prayer,  is,  that 
the  Church  may  be  restored  again  in  the  unity  of  its 
government,  and  the  unfeigned  love  of  its  members. 
And  yet  I  cannot  conceal  from  myself,  that  even  this 
blessing,  much  as  it  is  to  be  desired,  earnestly  as  it  is 
to  be  sought  after,  may  be  bought  at  too  great  a  price. 
The  price  would  be  too  great,  if,  to  obtain  it,  we  were 
required  to  violate  conscience,  to  deny  what  we  believe 
to  be  true,  or  to  express  repentance  for  what  we  do  not 
see  to  be  evil.  The  assurances,  however,  which  I  have 
received  from  a  number  of  friends  at  the  North,  lead 
me  to  believe  that  the  great  body  of  the  Church  there 
desire  nothing  of  the  sort.  .  .  .  And  let  me  add,  that 
what  is  right  to  be  done  on  this  mighty  subject,  it  is 
right  should  be  done  quickly.     The  interests  are  too 


222  THE    CHURCH 

momentous  to  be  left  to  the  hazards  and  uncertainties 
of  time.  May  God  give  us  wisdom  and  understanding 
and  faithful  hearts  to  see  our  duty  and  to  follow  it! 
And  at  the  same  time  it  is  our  duty,  as  it  is,  I  am  sure, 
our  wish,  in  all  we  do  on  this  subject,  to  consult,  and, 
as  far  as  possible,  cooperate  with,  the  other  Dioceses 
of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States." 

The  laymen  and  the  clergy  of  North  Carolina  had 
come  to  feel  great  confidence  in  the  wisdom  of  their 
Bishop;  and  that  he  always  appealed  to  their  reason 
and  conscience,  and  never  wished  to  carry  any  measure 
by  the  weight  of  his  very  great  personal  influence, 
gave  all  the  greater  force  to  his  personal  feelings  and 
wishes.  They  probably  felt  as  did  the  large  majority 
of  other  Churchmen  in  the  South,  and  would  have 
preferred  some  delay,  and  united  action  by  all  the 
associated  Dioceses.  But  they  had  usually  followed 
his  advice  in  great  and  critical  matters;  he  had  never 
led  them  wrong;  and  they  followed  him  now.  There 
was,  however,  a  minority  against  him,  apparently  not 
numerous,  but  strong  in  intelligence  and  in  character. 
Some  indication  of  this  feeling  is  seen  in  the  fact  that 
the  Rev.  Alfred  A.  Watson,  one  of  the  noblest  men  in 
the  Church,  Northern  by  birth,  a  most  distinguished 
chaplain  in  the  Confederate  army,  subsequently  chair- 
man of  the  Committee  on  Canons  in  the  House  of 
Deputies,  and  then  the  first  Bishop  of  East  Carolina, 
moved  in  the  Council  that  a  committee  be  appointed 
to  whom  should  be  referred  so  much  of  the  Bishop's 
address  as  related  to  the  reunion  of  the  Dioceses;   and 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   223 

when  that  had  been  adopted,  moved  further,  "  That 
this  committee  be  appointed  by  election.''  This  was  a 
distinct  intimation  that  the  Council  should  oppose 
the  course  recommended  by  the  Bishop,  and  that  it 
should  make  sure  of  a  committee  who  would  report 
to  that  effect.  Thus  understood  the  resolution  was 
rejected,  and  then  the  Bishop  showed  his  quality  by 
naming  the  Rev.  Mr.  Watson  second  on  the  committee 
composed  of  some  of  the  most  eminent  members  of  the 
Council:  the  Rev.  Richard  S.  Mason,  D.D.,  the  Rev. 
Alfred  A.  Watson,  the  Rev.  Jos.  Blount  Cheshire,  D.D., 
the  Rev.  William  Hodges,  D.D.,  Hon.  William  H. 
Battle,  Hon.  William  M.  Shipp,  and  Mr.  Richard  H. 
Smith. 

Six  of  the  seven  members  of  this  committee  joined 
in  a  report  declaring  the  strong  desire  of  the  Diocese 
to  maintain  the  unity  of  the  Church  within  the  United 
States,  with  their  gratification  at  hearing  the  senti- 
ments expressed  by  the  Bishop  in  regard  to  reunion; 
and  gratefully  acknowledging  the  kindly  overtures 
made  to  the  Southern  Dioceses  by  the  Presiding  Bishop. 
They  submitted  two  resolutions  for  action: 

*' Resolved,  That  the  Diocese  of  North  Carolina  is 
prepared  to  resume  her  position  as  a  Diocese  in  con- 
nection with  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States,  whenever,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Bishop, 
after  consultation  with  the  Bishops  of  the  other 
Southern  Dioceses  (which  consultation  he  is  hereby 
requested  to  hold),  it  shall  be  consistent  with 
the    good    faith    which    she    owes    to    the    Dioceses 


224  THE    CHURCH 

with  which  she  has  been  in  union  during  the  last 
four  years. 

''Resolvedy  That,  with  a  view  to  such  contingency, 
there  be  four  clerical  and  four  lay  deputies  elected,  to 
represent  this  Diocese  in  the  ensuing  General  Conven- 
tion of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States."  1 

The  Rev.  Mr.  Watson,  the  only  man  of  Northern 
birth  on  the  committee,  submitted  a  minority  report 
providing,  in  substance,  that  if  all  the  Southern 
Dioceses  should  authorize  their  Bishops  to  act  for  them, 
and  if  a  majority  of  these  Bishops  should  deem  it  right 
and  advisable  to  reunite  with  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States,  "it  shall  be  competent 
to  the  [said]  Bishops  to  take  all  the  steps  necessary 
to  effect  or  complete  such  reunion,  so  far  as  the  Diocese 
of  North  Carolina  is  concerned."  This  was  indeed  a 
strange  and  impracticable  proposition,  but  it  served 
at  least  to  define  the  issue.  It  was  rejected  by  a 
decisive  majority,  as  was  also  another  series  of  resolu- 
tions, introduced  by  Mr.  Edward  J.  Hale,  referring 
the  whole  subject  to  the  General  Council  appointed 
to  be  held  in  Mobile^  November  8.  Both  resolutions 
reported  by  the  majority  were  then  adopted;  and  the 
following  deputies  were  elected  in  pursuance  of  the 
second  resolution:  of  the  clergy,  the  Rev.  Drs.  Richard 
S.  Mason,  Joseph  B.  Cheshire,  Fordyce  M.  Hubbard, 
and  William  Hodges;  and  of  the  laity,  the  Hon.  William 

^  Deputies  were  also  elected  to  represent  the  Diocese  in  the  "Gen- 
eral Council"  to  be  held  in  Augusta,  in  November. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   225 

H.  Battle,  Messrs.  Richard  H.  Smith,  Kemp  P.  Battle, 
and  Robert  Strange. 

The  resolutions  of  the  Diocese  of  North  Carolina 
are  almost  identical  with  those  of  the  Diocese  of 
Georgia.  Both  express  an  earnest  desire  for  the 
reunion  of  the  separated  Dioceses,  so  soon  as  might 
be  consistent  with  their  honorable  obligations;  and 
both  refer  it  to  the  Bishop  to  determine  when  that 
time  shall  have  come.  Both  also  provide  for  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  Diocese  in  the  approaching  General 
Convention  at  Philadelphia,  "in  view  of  such  con- 
tingency." But  there  was  this  very  radical  difference 
in  the  effect  of  the  action  of  the  two  Dioceses:  the 
Bishop  of  Georgia  was  openly  and  peremptorily  op- 
posed to  going  back  to  the  General  Convention,  until 
the  meeting  of  the  General  Council  had  enabled  the 
Southern  Dioceses  to  confer  together,  and  to  agree 
upon  terms  of  reunion,  which  the  General  Convention 
should  be  called  upon  to  accept.  This  being  the  case, 
it  was  perfectly  certain  that  the  action  of  the  Diocesan 
Council  of  Georgia  had  not  at  all  advanced  the  cause 
of  immediate  reunion.  On  the  other  hand.  Bishop 
Atkinson  was  declaredly  in  favor  of  having  the  Southern 
Dioceses  represented  in  the  coming  General  Conven- 
tion, and  trusting  to  the  vital  power  of  Christian 
fellowship  to  secure  appropriate  action  by  the  Con- 
vention, and  not  standing  apart  in  an  attitude  of 
suspicion  until  such  action  had  been  taken.  He  was 
no  more  willing  than  Bishop  Elliott  to  give  up  any 
principle,  or  to  agree,  to  any  unworthy  concession, 
16 


THE    CHURCH 

but  he  believed  that  when  brethren  looked  each  other 
in  the  face,  and  felt  the  love  of  brethren  in  their  hearts, 
they  would  not  be  long  in  adjusting  any  diflScult 
questions  which  might  arise.  This  was  Bishop  Atkin- 
son's known  attitude;  and  the  action  of  his  Diocesan 
Council,  in  electing  deputies  to  the  General  Convention, 
and  leaving  it  for  him  to  say  when  they  should  take 
their  places  in  that  body,  was  felt  to  be  the  first  great 
step  taken  towards  speedy  reunion. 

The  Council  of  the  Diocese  of  Virginia  met  in  St. 
Paul's  Church,  Richmond,  September  30;  and  in  all 
his  long  and  faithful  service  Bishop  Johns  never  showed 
to  better  advantage  than  in  his  address  to  that  body. 
He  felt  clear  of  any  taint  of  schism  in  thought  or 
purpose;  he  felt  no  doubt  of  the  propriety  of  any 
action  by  him  or  his  Diocese  in  connection  with  the 
War;  but  he  saw  the  dangers  which  beset  the  path  of 
a  perpetuated  division.  His  own  good  heart  could 
trust  the  hearts  of  his  Northern  brethren.  He  had 
been  deeply  moved  by  the  appeal  of  the  Presiding 
Bishop,  and  by  letters  and  messages  of  affection  from 
others  of  the  North,  in  some  cases  from  those  furthest 
removed  from  him  in  former  associations  and  in  theolog- 
ical sympathies.  With  simple  yet  lofty  magnanimity, 
sadly  rare  even  in  the  best  men,  he  had  gratefully 
acknow^ledged,  and  gratefully  declined,  offers  of 
pecuniary  assistance  for  his  impoverished  Diocese  and 
clergy;  saying,  with  simple  dignity  and  unconscious 
heroism,  that  it  would  be  better  for  his  people  by  self- 
denial    and    mutual    helpfulness    to    bear    their    own 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   227 

burdens,  rather  than  to  become  a  burden  upon 
others.^ 

But  these  things  had  touched  his  heart,  and  had 
satisfied  him  that  the  Church  in  the  South  had  nothing 
to  fear  in  taking  that  course  to  which  his  feehngs 
impelled  him.  He  was  an  eloquent  man,  and  had  a 
singularly  clear  view  of  true  ethical  principles  and  of 
their  application  to  Christian  conduct.  He  put  before 
his  Council  with  great  persuasive  force  the  duty  of 
terminating  at  once  the  separation  which  had  been 
caused  by  the  unhappy  exigencies  of  a  state  of  war. 
Bishop  Atkinson  had  spoken  with  the  power  of  a 
Christian  patriot  and  Catholic  Bishop.  Bishop  Johns, 
a  sound  and  subtle  casuist,  in  the  best  sense  of  the  words, 
spoke  with  the  searching  discrimination  of  a  wise  and 
loving  pastor,  detecting  and  exposing  the  cunning  de- 
ceits of  the  human  heart.  Beginning  with  the  general 
agreement  that  ultimate  reunion  was  to  be  desired,  he 
exposed  the  weakness  of  the  plea  for  postponing  action : 

**If,  as  a  people,  we  are  solicitous  for  a  speedy  civil 
reunion,  why  should  we  not,  as  a  Church,  be  equally 
desirous  of  a  speedy  reestablishment  of  our  ecclesiasti- 
cal relations? 

1  This  was  in  response  to  the  generous  offer  of  the  Bishop  of  New 
York.  A  similar  proposition  from  the  Board  of  Missions  the  Bishop 
laid  before  the  Council.     The  Council  adopted  the  following: 

"Resolved  by  the  Council  of  the  Diocese  of  Virginia,  That  while  we 
do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  accept  their  offer  (tender  of  funds)  we  acknowl- 
edge it  with  gratification,  and  return  our  thanks  to  the  Domestic 
Committee  for  the  fraternal  spirit  and  liberal  disposition  manifested 
in  their  action." 


228  THE    CHURCH 

"Are  there  any  sensibilities  which  may  be  disre- 
garded in  the  one  adjustment,  but  which  require  to  be 
consulted  and  indulged  in  the  other? 

"May  we  be  more  implacable  as  Churchmen  than 
as  citizens? 

"If  time  is  necessary  to  compose  our  feelings,  how 
much  must  be  taken?  Whose  experience  is  to  deter- 
mine the  measure?  Is  there  any  other  scriptural 
limit  than  the  'going  down  of  the  sun'? 

"Are  not  such  feelings  better  disciplined  by  immedi- 
ate, resolute  mortification  than  by  indulgent  allowance? 

"Would  it  not  be  more  becoming  in  us  to  assume 
that  those  with  whom  we  are  willing  to  be  reunited 
will  do  what  is  right  without  being  held  to  it  by  a 
pledge,  especially  as  the  doing  what  we  desire  would 
be  compatible  with  their  principles;  but  a  pledge  to 
that  effect  would  involve  a  recognition  irreconcilable 
with  their  known  convictions  of  ecclesiastical  order, 
and  which  therefore,  as  they  cannot  consistently  give, 
we  ought  not  to  propose? 

"Is  not  resumption  of  former  relations,  without 
concessions  or  promises,  the  only  way  in  which  reunion 
is  practicable,  and  would  it  not  furnish  surer  hope  of  a 
peaceful  and  profitable  future  than  any  formal  con- 
cordat attained  by  diplomatic  negotiation? 

"If  the  endeavor  to  present  a  correct  view  of  our 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   229 

position  and  of  the  policy  which  it  suggests,  reveals 
the  inclination  it  has  given  to  my  own  judgment,  it 
has  but  done  what  I  have  no  desire  to  avoid.  I  trust 
it  has  been  effected  without  even  the  appearance  of 
presumption,  or  a  word  that  would  produce  any  other 
excitement  than  such  as  is  inseparable  from  a  sub- 
ject of  paramount  interest.  .  .  .  The  tempest  might 
readily  be  reproduced  by  a  simple  recital  of  wrong  and 
suffering  which  have  been  endured.  These,  indeed, 
may  not  soon  or  easily  be  forgotten,  nor  is  this  required, 
but  they  may  and  must  be  forgiven.  .  .  .  Christians 
are  to  be  peacemakers.  Their  heaven-descended 
motto  is,  'On  earth  peace,  good  will  toward  men.* 
In  'following  after  the  things  which  make  for  peace,' 
as  they  are  commanded,  they  care  not  to  calculate 
how  long  wounded  sensibilities  may  be  expected  to 
weep,  or  memory  be  allowed  to  eliminate  their  wrongs. 
The  proffered  hand  may  be  accepted  before  the 
lacerations  it  has  inflicted  are  healed,  or  often  it  would 
be  impossible  to  do  so  at  all,  for  there  are  lacerations 
which  the  heart  cannot  cease  to  feel  till  it  ceases  to 
beat.  We  are  to  be  imitators  of  Him  Who,  'whilst 
we  were  sinners '  died  for  us;  Who  when  pierced  in  every 
limb,  prayed  for  the  forgiveness  of  His  persecutors 
whilst  they  were  rending  Him  in  their  rage.  'Even  as 
Christ  forgave  you,  so  do  ye,'  is  the  rule  and  measure 
for  His  followers.  And  with  this  pattern  of  prompt 
and  unsolicited  forgiveness  of  complicated  violence 
and  wrong,  infinitely  surpassing  all  that  man  can  ex- 
perience  from   his   fellow-man,   it   would   ill   become 


230  THE    CHURCH 

those  who  profess  and  call  themselves  Christians  to 
nourish  resentment  by  dwelling  upon  injuries,  or  to 
plead  sorrow,  which  it  is  proper  to  feel,  in  delay  of 
reconciliation,  which  it  would  be  wrong  to  defer,  —  a 
plea  which,  if  it  is  allowed,  may  be  in  force  for  life,  and 
adjourn  reunion  for  the  consideration  of  a  generation 
unborn." 

So  much  of  the  Bishop's  address  as  referred  to  the 
reunion  of  the  Dioceses  was  referred  to  a  distinguished 
committee,  and  after  some  debate  a  series  of  resolutions 
was  adopted,  cordially  approving  the  course  of  the 
Bishop,  in  his  correspondence  with  the  presiding  Bishop 
of  the  Church  in  the  United  States  and  others  upon 
the  subject,  expressing  the  desire  of  the  Council  to 
respond  cordially  to  every  sentiment  of  fraternal 
regard  conveyed  to  them  by  the  Bishop,  but  wholly 
unresponsive  to  the  Bishop's  eloquent  appeal  for  im- 
mediate reunion.  That  whole  matter  was  referred  to 
the  General  Council  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate 
States,  to  meet  in  Augusta  on  the  second  Wednesday 
of  the  following  November. 

Though  the  formal  action  of  the  Council,  as  recorded 
in  the  Journal,  was  entirely  non-commital,  and  no 
allusion  was  made  to  the  urgent  appeal  of  the  Bishop, 
the  ineffectiveness  at  the  time  of  the  Bishop's  earnest 
words  is  not  mere  matter  of  inference  from  the  silence 
of  the  record.  Bishop  Johns  commanded  in  a  high 
degree  the  love  and  confidence  of  his  Diocese,  but  in 
this  matter  he  could  not  carry  them  with  him.  There 
was  a  strong  sentiment  in  the  Council  earnestly  op- 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   231 

posed  to  his  views  and  to  his  hopes.  There  were  some, 
it  cannot  now  be  known  how  many,  who  anticipated, 
and  ardently  desired,  the  perpetuation  of  an  independ- 
ent Southern  Church.  By  one  speaker  at  least  the 
position  taken  by  Bishop  Wilmer  and  Bishop  Green 
was  strongly  commended;  and  the  hope  was  indulged 
that  those  Dioceses  which  had  seemed  favorable  to 
reunion  might  be  won  back  by  the  influence  of  those 
which  should  stand  for  permanent  separation.^  It  is 
probable  that  this  was  a  fleeting  sentiment  only,  not 
representing  any  fixed  purpose  or  definite  policy,  but 
merely  an  instinctive  impulse  to  hold  on  to  a  fair  but 
vanishing  image,  an  ideal  consecrated  by  the  sufferings 
and  sacrifices  of  the  preceding  four  years  of  struggle 
and  of  hope.  Strong  and  earnest  natures  sometimes 
find  it  a  difficult  task  to  adjust  themselves  readily  to 
the  changing  demands  of  even  duty  and  necessity. 

Of  the  Bishops  only  the  Bishop  of  South  Carolina 
seems  to  have  continued  to  cherish  the  scheme  of  a 
permanently  separate  organization.  His  Pastoral, 
presently  to  be  quoted,  belongs  to  this  period.  In  his 
thought  this  scheme  had  a  definite  purpose,  and  his 
sentiment  was  associated  with  serious  convictions  of 
truth,  and  a  distinct,  though  elusive,  hope.  The 
impoverished  and  desolated  state  of  his  Diocese  made 
it  impossible  to  assemble  his  clergy  and  people  in  a 
Diocesan  Council.     He  therefore  addressed  them  in  a 

*  One  speaker  said:  "A  bold  course  by  this  Council  today  would 
induce  Texas  to  come  back,  and  the  Bishop  of  Georgia  would  never 
go  out." 


232  THE    CHURCH 

Pastoral  letter,  dated  October  5,  1865.  He  set  before 
them  the  situation  of  the  Church,  and  opened  to  them 
his  hopes  and  his  fears.     He  says  in  part: 

*'No  sound  mind  can  suppose  that  the  separation 
of  the  Southern  from  the  Northern  Church,  under  the 
influence  of  the  political  revolution  which  has  passed 
over  the  country,  can  be  schismatical.  .  .  .  There 
had  been  therefore  no  schism.  The  Southern  Church 
is  now  rightly  constituted,  and  is  an  independent  and 
integral  branch  of  the  Church  Catholic.  As  such  she 
can,  of  right,  shape  her  own  course.  She  is,  also,  free 
to  return  to  her  union  with  the  Church  at  the  North. 
Which  shall  she  do?  This  is  the  great  proposition. 
In  determining  it,  brethren,  we  should  look  deeply 
into  ourselves.  Unchristian  sentiments  may  prove  as 
injurious  as  false  petitions.  Let  us  make  the  severe 
mental  effort  of  severing  ourselves  from  all  feelings 
and  purposes  not  purely  Christian.  Let  no  fanaticism 
of  independence  disturb  the  spirit  of  Catholic  concord 
and  union;  nor  any  want  of  Christian  courage  dimin- 
ish our  supreme  regard  for  purity  and  truth.  To 
plant  ourselves  on  the  true  basis  is  our  lofty  purpose. 
The  Church  is  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apos- 
tles and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  head 
corner  stone.     To  this  we  will  strive  to  adhere. 

*'We  cannot  but  perceive  that  the  age  is  political 
and  secular  in  its  tendencies.  Its  ruling  powers  are 
those  of  combination.  This  secures  dominion,  but  is 
dangerous  to  truth.  We  must  think,  too,  that  a  terri- 
tory so  immense,  with  a  population  so  heterogeneous 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   233 

and  discordant,  as  that  conii)rehendcd  l)ctwecn  the 
Atlantic  and  Pacific,  the  Lakes  and  the  Rio  Grande,  is 
too  much  for  any  one  Church.  Our  Southern  country 
is  limited,  homogeneous,  and  not  given  to  speculations. 
Does  it  not  appear  then  that  here  is  our  surest  foun- 
dation for  peace  and  truth? 

"I  declare  to  you,  brethren,  my  strong  desire  is, 
that,  under  the  mercy  and  guiding  providence  of  God, 
the  Southern  Church  may  be  enabled  to  maintain  her 
present  independent  and  Catholic  position.  This  I 
will  seek,  and  to  this  give  my  best  efforts.  But  should 
this  be  otherwise  ordered  by  counsels  stronger  than 
our  own,  let  the  motto  of  the  Diocese  of  South  Caro- 
lina ever  be: 

A  Church  divine,  not  human; 

A  Gospel  pure  and  perfect." 

Bishop  Davis  alludes  to  the  subject  again  in  his 
address  to  his  Council  of  February  14,  1866:  "I  had 
hoped  that  it  might  be  the  will  of  our  God  that  we 
should  have  an  independent,  united,  self-sustaining 
Southern  Church.  To  such  hope  my  sympathies  and 
affections  strongly  clung;  I  thought  I  could  see,  too, 
a  purer  atmosphere  for  faith;  this  I  signified  to  you 
in  a  late  Pastoral  letter.'* 

Bishop  Davis  was  a  man  of  singular  purity,  eleva- 
tion of  character,  and  spiritual  intensity.  He  was  one 
of  the  best  examples  of  a  type  of  old-fashioned  Evan- 
gelical, with  perhaps  a  mild  infusion  of  Galvanism, 
after  the  manner  of  John  Newton  and  Cowper,  a  little 
toned  up  in  churchmanship  by  the  early  influence  of 


234  THE    CHURCH 

Bishop  Ravenscroft,  and  by  his  years  of  service  under 
Bishop  Ives.  He  was  naturally  inclined  to  introspec- 
tion, a  tendency  probably  strengthened  by  the  gradual 
failure,  and  final  total  loss,  of  his  eyesight.  He  seems 
to  have  been  much  depressed  at  this  time  by  the 
changes  which  he  saw  coming  over  the  world  and  over 
the  Church.  He  had  dreamed  a  beautiful  dream  of  a 
Southern  Church,  in  which  the  simplicity  and  piety  of 
an  earlier  age  might  be  renewed,  and  in  which  modern 
doubt  and  restlessness  and  innovation  should  be  un- 
known: ''I  thought  I  could  see  a  purer  atmosphere  for 
faith.''  There  was  no  element  of  bitterness  or  of 
ill-will  to  any  in  his  thought.  As  in  1861  he  had  put 
forth  the  most  acute  and  philosophical  argument  to 
support  his  theory  of  separation,  so  now  he  alone 
seems  to  have  had  some  definite  and  noble  aspiration 
in  his  fleeting  hope  of  an  independent  Southern  Church; 
not  of  a  Church  divided  from  the  communion  and 
fellowship  of  his  Northern  brethren,  but  a  separate 
legislative  and  administrative  branch  of  the  One 
Catholic  Church,  to  be  the  first  real  Province,  and  so 
to  be  the  beginning  of  a  reorganization,  of  the  Church 
in  the  United  States,  demanded  by  the  immense  extent 
of  our  territory,  the  variety  of  our  population,  and  the 
multiplicity  of  our  interests.  This  seems  to  have  been 
the  idea  dimly  showing  itself  to  the  anxious  mind  of 
the  saintly  blind  Bishop.^ 

1  There  was  nothing  of  temper  or  self-will  in  Bishop  Davis's 
desire  for  this  separate  Southern  Church.  Those  who  knew  him  did 
not  need  to  have  any  proof  of  this;  to  those  who  did  not  know  him 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   235 

The  net  result  then  of  all  these  meetings  and  dis- 
cussions was,  that,  of  the  Dioceses  still  in  doubt, 
North  Carolina  alone,  and  its  Bishop,  were  committed 
to  the  policy  of  immediate  reunion,  subject  to  the 
judgment  of  the  Bishop,  after  consultation  with  his 
Episcopal  brethren  of  the  South.  Bishop  Atkinson 
felt  that  to  stand  apart,  and  to  demand  terms,  and  to 
impose  conditions,  w^hether  by  the  one  party  or  the 
other,  would,  in  the  then  sensitive  state  of  the  public 
mind,  be  to  insure  incalculable  strife,  dissension,  and 
ill-feeling.  On  the  other  hand  he  felt  that,  face  to 
face  with  his  brethren,  it  would  be  possible  to  ignore 
difficulties,  and  to  find  a  solid  foundation  for  mutual 
agreement  in  the  development  of  mutual  good-will  and 
personal  affection  and  confidence.  This  relationship 
being  established,  a  way  would  certainly  be  found  to 
compose  all  matters  of  difference  necessary  to  be  ar- 
ranged, w^hich  were  few  indeed;  and  all  matters  of 
difference,  not  demanding  adjustment,  w^ould  instinc- 
tively be  avoided  in  the  satisfaction  of  renewed  fra- 
ternal communion.  In  the  old  established  Dioceses 
on  the  Atlantic  Coast  it  was  not  to  be  expected  that 
such  instantaneous  transition  could  be  effected,  back 

his  ready  compliance  with  the  demands  of  the  situation  was  ample 
proof.  He  said  to  his  Council,  February  14,  1866:  "God  has  other- 
wise determined:  we  will  follow  the  Divine  determination.  It  is 
enough  for  the  Christian  to  know  what  the  Divine  will  is.  .  .  . 
Let  us  rise  up  to  our  new  responsibility,  not  sluggishly,  reluctantly, 
or  opposingly,  but  with  clear  judgments,  the  spirit  of  alacrity,  and 
Christian  confidence.  I  advise  the  immediate  return  of  the  Diocese 
into  union  with  the  Church  in  the  United  States." 


236  THE    CHURCH 

and  forth,  as  seemed  to  have  taken  place  in  the  new 
and  scarcely  organized  Diocese  of  Texas.  And,  more- 
over. Bishop  Atkinson  most  thoroughly  repudiated 
the  theory  of  ecclesiastical  law  upon  which  the  Bishop 
and  Diocese  of  Texas  had  acted.  He  felt  that  if  the 
Southern  Dioceses  returned,  they  must  do  so  by  their 
voluntary  action,  and  not  by  some  automatic  effect 
of  a  political  change.  And  he  had,  against  much 
popular  feeling,  secured  such  action  by  his  Diocesan 
Council  as  enabled  him  to  pursue  that  course  which 
he  believed  to  be  right  in  principle  and  prudent  in 
policy. 

Thus  trusting  in  the  Christian  affection  and  cour- 
tesy of  his  brethren,  it  must  have  been  with  great 
satisfaction  and  with  renewed  confidence  that  he  read 
in  the  public  press  the  report  of  the  Diocesan  Conven- 
tion of  New  York,  which  met  September  27.  In  his 
address  to  that  Convention,  Bishop  Horatio  Potter 
thus  refers  to  the  anticipated  presence  of  representa- 
tives of  the  Southern  Church  at  the  sessions  of  the 
approaching  General  Convention:  "It  will  be  a  reun- 
ion that  will  arouse  the  tenderest  sensibilities  of  every 
Christian  heart.  It  will  show  that  old  affections  have 
been  restrained,  not  extinguished,  and  that  feelings 
long  pent  up  claim  a  more  than  ordinary  indulgence 
in  demonstrations  of  love,  respect,  and  sympathy.  I 
verily  believe,  as  I  do  most  fervently  hope  and  pray, 
that  not  one  word  of  reproach  or  bitterness  will  be 
heard,  not  one  look  of  coldness  appear,  to  mar  the  dig- 
nity and  loveliness  of  the  touching  scene.    In  that  much 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   237 

longed-for  welcome  hour  we  shiill  need  no  declanilion 
of  principles,  no  formal  vindication  of  the  i)eaceful 
character  of  the  Christian  ministry.  Divine  Provi- 
dence has  spoken.  Any  words  that  we  can  use  in 
reference  to  the  past,  whether  persons  or  things,  will 
be  mere  impertinence,  adding  nothing  to  the  lessons 
that  come  to  us  from  above,  and  only  tending  to  change 
celestial  harmonies  into  the  miserable,  discordant 
sounds  of  earth-born  passion."  In  response  to  this 
appeal   the   following   action   was   recorded: 

''Resolved,  That  the  Convention  cordially  respond 
to  the  sentiments  of  the  Bishop  respecting  the  return 
of  peace  to  our  land,  and  the  treatment  of  our  Southern 
brethren  in  view  of  this  contingency." 

It  happened  that  the  Rev.  Dr.  Quintard,  late  chap- 
Iain  in  the  Confederate  army,  and  at  this  time 
Bishop-elect  of  Tennessee,  was  in  the  city  of  New 
York,  and  being  presented  to  the  Convention  met 
a  most  cordial  reception,  as  an  illustration  of  the 
sentiments  expressed  in  their  resolution  spread  upon 
the  record. 

It  has  been  mentioned  that  Bishop  Elliott  had  sum- 
moned the  Southern  Bishops  to  meet  for  mutual  coun- 
sel and  advice  in  Augusta  on  the  27th  of  September. 
The  Diocesan  Council  of  North  Carolina  probably  had 
this  meeting  in  mind,  as  affording  Bishop  Atkinson  a 
convenient  opportunity  of  conferring  wdth  the  other 
Bishops.  But  shortly  after  the  adjournment  of  his 
Council,  Bishop  Atkinson  received  notice  from  Bishop 
Elliott  that  the  proposed  meeting  would  not  be  held, 


238  THE    CHURCH 

on  account  of  the  diflSculty  and  expense  of  travel. 
It  had  been  ascertained  that  the  Bishops  could  not  be 
gotten  together.  Bishop  Atkinson  himself  was  at  this 
time  quite  unwell,  and  his  health  was  a  source  of  some 
anxiety  to  his  family  and  Diocese.  It  is  quite  probable 
that  he  had  already  found  himself  unable  to  attempt 
a  journey  to  Augusta. 

Thus  it  seemed  impossible  to  comply  with  the  con- 
dition expressed  in  the  resolution  authorizing  the 
diocesan  representation  in  the  General  Convention, 
and  all  the  fair  hopes  based  thereon  seemed  in  a  mo- 
ment blasted.  But  Bishop  Atkinson  knew  that,  while 
it  had  been  the  desire  of  his  Council,  as  it  had  been  his 
own  desire  and  suggestion,  that  all  kindly  respect 
should  be  shown  to  their  Southern  brethren,  the  issue 
in  the  Council  had  been,  whether  or  not  the  Diocese 
should  be  represented  in  the  General  Convention;  and 
the  Council  had  accepted  his  interpretation  of  the 
significance  and  gravity  of  the  crisis,  and  had  decided 
that  it  should  be  so  represented.  It  had  not  been 
understood  that  the  condition  expressed  could  make 
such  representation  impossible.  He  felt  that  to  allow 
this  would  be  to  disappoint  the  expectation  of  his  peo- 
ple who  had  trusted  him;  and  he  believed  that  it 
threatened  infinite  damage  to  the  best  interests  of  the 
Church  and  of  the  country.  He  therefore  determined 
that  he  would  proceed  to  Philadelphia,  so  that  he  might 
be  prepared  to  act  as  the  necessity  of  the  situation 
should  seem  to  demand;  and  he  called  upon  his  cleri- 
cal and  lay  deputies  to  meet  him  in  Philadelphia  at 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   239 

the  time  of  the  opening  of  the  General  Convention, 
October  4.  He  had  not  fully  determined  upon  his 
course;  he  would  be  guided  by  the  development  of  the 
situation. 

The  opening  of  this  Convention,  as  it  relates  to  our 
subject,  may  be  given  in  the  words  of  an  eye-witness, 
the  Rev.  John  Henry  Hopkins,  Jr.,  in  the  Life  of  his 
Father : 

"On  the  morning  of  the  first  Wednesday  in  October 
that  year,  as  I  was  going  up  the  southern  flight  of  stone 
steps  to  the  porch  of  St.  Luke's  Church,  Philadelphia, 
to  attend  the  opening  of  the  General  Convention,  I 
saw,  leaning  against  the  iron  railing  at  the  half-way 
landing,  the  beloved  Bishop  Atkinson,  of  North  Caro- 
lina, and  round  him  a  group  of  clergy  and  laity,  wel- 
coming him  most  cordially.  He  was  the  first  Southern 
Bishop  I  had  seen  since  the  war  began;  and  while 
joining  my  congratulations  to  those  of  the  others,  my 
father  came  up  the  steps,  and  I  had  the  delight  of 
witnessing  the  greeting  between  the  two,  when  both 
their  hearts  seemed  too  full  to  permit  of  easy  utterance. 
All  united  —  none  more  strongly  than  my  father  — 
in  urging  the  Bishop  of  North  Carolina  to  return  at 
once  to  his  own  place,  and  enter  robed  in  the  pro- 
cession with  his  brethren.  But  he  steadily  refused; 
giving  as  his  reason  his  delicate  regard  for  his  South- 
ern brethren  who  had  not  come  on.  He  was  unwilling, 
even  in  appearance,  to  separate  himself  from  them  or 
act  in  so  important  a  matter  without  them;  and  he 
therefore  took  his  seat  in  the  body  of  the  church  with 


240  THECHURCH 

the  congregation.  But  when  in  the  midst  of  the 
service,  the  call  was  again  made  upon  him,  openly 
and  by  name,  he  could  refuse  no  longer,  but  rose,  ad- 
vanced, and  was  welcomed  at  the  Altar  with  joyful 
thanksgiving." 

The  printed  journals  of  the  General  Convention  do 
not  show  just  what  took  place.  They  mention  the 
presence  of  Bishop  Atkinson,  of  North  Carolina,  at  the 
opening  service,  and  in  noting  the  service  on  the  morn- 
ing of  the  second  day,  the  record  is:  "Present  as 
yesterday,  with  the  addition  of  the  Right  Rev.  H.  C. 
Lay,  D.D.,  Missionary  Bishop  of  the  South  West,'* 
etc.  But  it  cannot  be  discovered  from  the  record  that 
any  unusual  circumstances  marked  their  appearance 
or  attendance  upon  the  sessions.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
although  Bishop  Atkinson  yielded  to  the  affectionate 
importunity  of  his  brethren,  and  joined  them  in  the 
opening  service,  yet  he  hesitated  about  taking  his  seat 
in  the  House  of  Bishops  until  he  had  some  assurance 
of  the  disposition  of  the  house  towards  his  absent 
brethren.  Bishop  Lay  seems  to  have  arrived  after 
Bishop  Atkinson,  and  upon  being  pressed  to  resume 
their  seats,  they  took  Bishop  Potter,  of  New  York, 
into  their  confidence,  and  especially  desired  to  be 
assured  of  the  course  likely  to  be  taken  in  the  case  of 
the  Bishop  of  Alabama.  During  the  recess  of  the 
House  of  Bishops,  Bishop  Potter  communicated  in- 
formally with  influential  members  of  the  house,  and 
carried  back  to  the  two  Bishops  an  invitation  to  take 
their  seats,  and  "to  trust  to  the  honor  and  love  of  their 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   241 

brethren."  Such  a  basis  of  union  appealed  to  both 
men,  and  they  promptly  entered  the  House  of  Bishops, 
and  were  received  with  most  cordial  expressions  of  joy 
and  affection.  The  same  day  the  clerical  and  lay 
deputies  from  North  Carolina  took  their  seats  in  the 
lower  house,  doubtless  by  the  advice  of  the  Bishop.^ 
Texas  and  Tennessee  were  also  represented  by  depu- 
ties in  both  orders,  and  the  reunion  of  the  Dioceses  had 
in  a  measure  been  effected. 

We  of  this  day  can  hardly  realize  what  a  venture  of 
faith  it  was  for  a  Southern  delegate  to  undertake  that 
trip  to  Philadelphia  in  October,  1865.  That  city  was 
thought  to  be  one  in  which  anti-Southern  feeling  had 
been  most  intense.  It  was  in  Philadelphia  that  the 
Episcopal  Recorder  had  been  uttering  its  bitterness; 
and  some  of  its  leading  Churchmen  were  of  national 
reputation  and  influence  as  leaders  in  all  those  matters 
in  which  the  North  and  the  South  had  been  arrayed  in 
arms  against  each  other.  And  although  they  held 
fast  to  their  trust  in  that  Christian  fellowship,  which 
drew  them  on  to  make  this  venture  for  its  preservation, 
they  had  many  anxious  thoughts;  and  we,  who  remained 
at  home,  looked  with  mingled  hope  and  fear  for  the 

^  The  Hon.  Kemp  P.  Battle,  late  President  of  the  University  of 
North  Carolina,  was  in  18G5  the  youngest  of  the  lay  deputies  from 
his  Diocese  attending  the  General  Convention  in  Philadelphia.  He 
said  to  Bishop  Atkinson,  on  the  first  day  of  the  Convention,  that  he 
was  satisfied,  from  what  he  had  experienced  and  observed  in  personal 
intercourse  with  the  members,  that  they  might  safely  take  their  seats 
at  once.  The  Bishop  replied  pleasantly  that  the  enthusiasm  of 
young  men  must  be  held  in  a  little,  —  or  something  to  that  eflfect. 
17 


242  THE    CHURCH 

first  letters  which  should  tell  us  how  they  fared.  They 
had  acted  against  the  judgment  and  the  wishes  of  the 
great  body  of  their  Southern  brethren.  They  had  fol- 
lowed their  Bishop;  it  was  to  be  proven  whether  he 
had  again  led  them  aright. 

There  remained  no  more  doubt  after  the  second  day 
of  the  session.  On  all  sides  they  met  kindly  welcome 
and  hearty  greetings.  Not  only  in  the  sessions  of  the 
Convention  and  in  the  general  intercourse  among  the 
members,  but  generous  citizens  of  Philadelphia,  es- 
pecially John  and  William  Welsh,  par  nohile  fratrum, 
made  them  at  home  in  their  houses,  and  without  their 
knowledge  paid  their  hotel  bills,  and  carried  them  off 
to  be  their  honored  guests  for  the  rest  of  the  session, 
loading  them  with  every  courtesy  and  kindness  which 
their  generous  hearts  could  devise. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Hubbard,  one  of  the  deputies  from 
North  Carolina,  writing  from  Philadelphia  during  the 
session  of  the  Convention,  to  The  Church  Intelligencer, 
of  which  he  was  editor,  says  of  their  reception  and 
treatment:  "There  was  in  word,  in  look,  in  act,  a  sin- 
cerity that  could  not  be  mistaken  of  joy  that  we  were 
once  more  reunited.  We  felt  that  we  were  taken  to 
their  hearts  again,  not  as  reconciled  after  an  estrange- 
ment, but  simply  as  brethren  met  after  long  absence, 
brethren  whose  early  love  was  unbroken,  and  between 
whom  had  never  been  suspicion  or  mistrust.  They 
seem  to  have  risen  above  all  considerations  of  worldly 
interest,  to  have  realized  that  the  Kingdom  of  Christ 
is  not  of  this  world,  and  to  have  allowed  no  earthly 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   243 

sympathy  to  interfere  witli  their  affeetion  for  us  as 
brethren  in  Ilini."  ^ 

This  exuberance  of  emotion  and  sentiment,  which 
quite  justified  Bishop  Potter's  very  sanguine  antici- 
pations, as  expressed  in  the  quotation  on  a  previous 
page,  was  soon  put  to  the  test,  and  well  did  it  stand 
the  test.  Bishop  Atkinson  and  Bishop  Lay  had  felt 
that  Southern  men  should  be  present  in  that  Conven- 
tion, not  merely,  perhaps  not  chiefly,  because  they  be- 
lieved that  their  presence  would  call  out  the  strong 
fraternal  sympathies  of  their  former  association,  but 
because  they  knew  that,  face  to  face  and  under  the 
influence  of  mutual  sympathy  and  respect  engendered 
by  personal  contact,  the  few  delicate  matters  which 
had  to  be  considered  and  settled  would  be  better 
managed  than  if  each  party,  even  with  the  best  and 
most  generous  purposes,  stood  off  and  looked  only  at 
its  OTVTi  side  of  the  case. 

Bishop  Lay's  case  was  easily  disposed  of.  The  Con- 
vention would  readily  have  admitted  Arkansas  as  a 
Diocese,  and  accepted  him  as  its  Bishop,  if  that 
had  been  practicable  in  the  actual  condition  of 
affairs.  But  the  results  of  the  war  in  the  South 
West  had  left  little  or  nothing  of  the  scattered 
congregations  which  had  organized  as  a  Diocese  in 
November,  1862;    and    so    Bishop    Lay    was    simply 

^  In  Dr.  Brand's  "  Life  of  Bishop  Wbittingham  "  is  the  following 
statement:  "At  a  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Missions,  on  the  announce- 
ment by  a  member  that  the  two  Southern  Bishops  had  that  day  taken 
their  place  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis  was  sung." 


244  THE    CHURCH 

recognized  in  his  old  position  as  Missionary  Bishop  of 
the  South  West. 

The  case  of  Bishop  Wilmer  gave  Httle  real  trouble, 
although  his  relations  with  the  military  authorities 
in  Alabama  just  at  that  time  created  a  good  deal  of 
prejudice  in  the  minds  of  some  Northern  men.  By  a 
joint  resolution  of  the  two  houses  it  was  declared  that 
he  should  be  recognized  as  Bishop  of  Alabama,  upon 
making  the  Declaration  of  Conformity  contained  in 
the  Ordinal,  and  forwarding  to  the  Presiding  Bishop 
the  proper  evidence  and  testimonials  of  his  Consecra- 
tion. There  was  some  discussion  of  the  proper  form 
of  the  resolution,  w^ith  messages  back  and  forth  between 
the  two  houses,  but  no  real  difficulty,  and,  so  far  as 
appears  or  as  is  remembered,  no  immoderate  develop- 
ment of  sectional  feeling. 

The  real  trouble  came  with  the  introduction  of 
resolutions  for  the  appointment  of  a  joint  service  of 
thanksgiving  for  the  restoration  of  peace,  and  its 
accompanying  blessings  of  restored  unity.  The  record 
shows  the  gradual  process  by  w^hich  elements  of  differ- 
ence and  of  contention  were  eliminated,  and  a  form  of 
resolution  agreed  upon,  in  which  the  South  as  well  as 
the  North  could  cordially  unite.  And  looked  at  with 
an  eye  of  discrimination,  and  remembering  the  situa- 
tion of  affairs,  it  is  a  very  wonderful  record.  It  is 
easily  accessible  in  the  Journal  of  the  General  Con- 
vention, and  so  need  not  be  gone  over  here,  save  in  a 
brief  summary  of  the  chief  points.  Bishop  Burgess 
first  prepared  the  draft  of  a  resolution  which  he  showed 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   245 

to  Bishop  Lay,  who  pointed  out  that,  by  including  a 
reference  to  the  abohtion  of  slavery,  he  had  made  it 
diflficult  for  Southern  men  to  adopt  it,  whatever  might 
be  their  feelings,  without  putting  themselves  into  an 
embarrassing  position.  The  resolutions  also  contained 
an  emphatic  sentence  upon  the  reestablishment  of  the 
authority  of  the  United  States  government  over  all  the 
land.  Upon  his  own  request,  Bishop  Burgess  was  after- 
wards allowed  to  amend  his  resolutions  by  omitting 
the  reference  to  slavery.  Subsequently  the  whole 
matter  was  referred  to  a  committee  consisting  of  the 
five  senior  Bishops,  thus  making  Bishop  Hopkins 
chairman  of  the  committee.  This  committee  reported 
resolutions  appointing  a  special  service  of  thanksgiving 
"for  God's  manifold  mercies  to  our  country  and  His 
Church,  especially  in  giving  us  deliverance  from  the 
late  afflicting  war,  in  reestablishing  the  authority  of 
the  National  Government  over  all  the  land,  in  restor- 
ing to  our  country  the  blessings  of  union  and  concord, 
and  in  bringing  back  the  unity  of  the  Church  as  repre- 
sented in  this  Convention."  This  report,  with  the 
accompanying  resolution,  was  adopted  by  the  House 
of  Bishops. 

During  all  the  discussions  of  this  question,  Bishop 
Atkinson  and  Bishop  Lay  had  absented  themselves 
from  the  house.  Upon  the  assembling  of  the  House  of 
Bishops  in  its  next  session,  after  having  adopted  the 
report  and  resolution  of  the  committee  just  mentioned, 
it  became  known  that  the  two  Southern  Bishops  pres- 
ent felt  that  they  could  not  join  in  the  service  of  thanks- 


THE    CHURCH 

giving  in  the  terms  adopted  by  the  house;  and,  in 
order  to  give  them  an  opportunity  of  expressing  them- 
selves and  declaring  their  position,  Bishop  Odenheimer 
moved  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote,  and  the  question 
was  once  more  before  the  house.  The  words  of  Bishop 
Lay  will  best  describe  what  followed: 

"All  eyes  were  upon  Bishop  x^tkinson,  as  he  answered 
the  appeal  made  to  him.  He  knew  that  he  had  that 
to  say  which  must  needs  be  distasteful  to  men  full  of 
exultation  at  the  Southern  downfall.  With  no  diffi- 
dence and  with  no  temper,  rather  with  the  frankness 
of  a  child  uttering  his  thoughts,  he  opened  all  his  mind : 

"  *We  are  asked,'  said  he,  'to  unite  with  you  in 
returning  thanks  for  the  restoration  of  peace  and 
unity.  The  former  we  can  say,  the  latter  we  cannot 
say. 

We  are  thankful  for  the  restoration  of  peace.  War 
is  a  great  evil.  It  is  clear  to  my  mind  that  in  the 
counsels  of  the  All-wise,  the  issue  of  this  contest  was 
predetermined.  I  am  thankful  that  the  appointed  end 
has  come,  and  that  war  is  exchanged  for  peace.  But 
we  are  not  thankful  for  the  unity  described  in  the 
resolution,  *  reestablishing  the  authority  of  the  National 
Government  over  all  the  land.'  We  acquiesce  in  that 
result.  We  will  accommodate  ourselves  to  it,  and  will 
do  our  duty  as  citizens  of  the  common  Government. 
But  we  cannot  say  that  v»^e  are  thankful.  We  labored 
and  prayed  for  a  very  different  termination,  and,  if 
it  had  seemed  good  to  our  Heavenly  Father,  would 
have  been  very  thankful  for  the  War  to  result  otherwise 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   247 

than  it  has  resulted.  I  am  wiUing  to  say  I  am  thankful 
for  the  restoration  of  Peace  to  the  country  and  unity  to 
the  Church.''' 

Thereupon,  Bishop  Stevens,  of  Pennsylvania,  moved 
the  following  substitute  for  the  report  of  the  five 
Bishops: 

''Resolved,  That  the  House  of  Bishops,  in  considera- 
tion of  the  return  of  peace  to  the  country  and  unity  to 
the  Church,  propose  to  devote  Tuesday,  the  seventeenth 
day  of  October  instant,  as  a  day  of  Thanksgiving  and 
Prayer  to  Almighty  God  for  these  His  inestimable 
benefits;  and  that  an  appropriate  service,  prepared 
under  the  direction  of  the  Five  senior  Bishops,  be  held 
in  St.  Luke's  Church. 

**  Resolved,  That  the  Bishops  affectionately  request 
the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  to  join  with 
them  in  the  observance  and  services  of  the  proposed 
Thanksgiving." 

An  effort  was  made  to  lay  these  resolutions  on  the 
table,  but  it  was  defeated  by  the  decisive  vote  of  seven 
for  and  sixteen  against  the  motion  to  table.  The  reso- 
lutions w^ere  then  adopted,  and  being  the  same  day 
communicated  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Depu- 
ties, that  house  promptly  adopted  the  following  resolu- 
tion, proposed  by  Mr.  Hunt  of  Western  New  York: 

''Resolved,  That  this  House,  recognizing  with  pro- 
found gratitude  the  goodness  of  Almighty  God  mani- 
fested in  the  restoration  of  national  peace  and  union, 
will  cordially  unite  in  the  thanksgiving  services  ap- 
pointed by  the  House  of  Bishops  on  Tuesday  next.'* 


248  THE    CHURCH 

There  were  those  who  felt  much  dissatisfaction  that 
the  restoration  of  the  authority  of  the  Federal  govern- 
ment, and  the  abolition  of  slavery,  were  not  empha- 
sized in  the  appointment  of  this  day  of  thanksgiving; 
and  efforts  were  made  once  and  again  to  inject  into  the 
action  of  the  Convention  terms  which  should  express 
those  ideas.  We  are  told  that  political  newspapers 
took  up  the  matter,  and  in  other  ways  outside  pressure 
made  it  hard  for  many  of  the  deputies  to  adhere  to  the 
position  they  had  taken.  But  they  stood  nobly  by 
their  determination  to  sacrifice  their  own  feelings,  and 
to  restrain  their  natural  impulses,  in  order  that  their 
Southern  brethren  present  and  absent  might  be  fully 
assured  of  their  Christian  love  and  respect.  They 
promptly  and  decisively  voted  down  every  attempt 
made  to  alter  the  terms  of  the  resolutions  adopted,  and 
they  gave  thanks  to  God  for  restored  unity  and  love  in 
words  which  might  come  free  and  warm  from  every 
heart. 

Thus  in  spite  of  the  weakness  and  perversity  of 
human  nature,  and  the  faults  of  human  prejudice  and 
temper,  and  the  opposition  even  of  some  good  men  both 
North  and  South,  the  Spirit  of  Christ  ruled  in  the  Body 
of  Christ,  and  made  men  at  last  *'to  be  of  one  mind  in 
an  house." 

The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States  was  again  One,  as  the  result  of  the  meeting  of 
the  General  Convention  at  Philadelphia,  in  October, 
1865.  When  that  Convention  adjourned,  it  was  felt 
that  the  cause  of  unity  in  the  Church  was  safe. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   249 

There  is  but  litlle  to  iidd  in  the  story  of  the  Church 
in  the  Confcderiite  States.  The  Dioceses  of  the  South 
had  said  in  18G1  that  they  withdrew  from  the  Church 
in  the  United  States  only  because  of  the  necessity  aris- 
ing out  of  a  state  of  war.  When  the  War  had  passed 
by,  it  proved  to  be  even  as  they  had  said.  They  could 
not  remain  apart,  not  even  when  some  of  them  thought 
that  they  wished  to  do  so.  The  unity  of  the  One  Head 
drew  the  divided  members  together,  and  before  they 
knew  it  they  w^ere  again  One. 

The  General  Council  of  the  Southern  Church,  ac- 
cording to  the  provisions  of  its  constitution  adopted  in 
1862,  was  to  meet  the  second  Wednesday  in  November, 
1865.  The  place  originally  appointed  had  been  Mobile, 
but  it  was  changed  to  Augusta  on  account  of  the  mili- 
tary order  closing  the  Alabama  churches.  On  the  day 
appointed  the  Bishops  of  Georgia,  Virginia,  Mississippi, 
and  Alabama  met  in  St.  Paul's  Church,  Augusta,  with 
clerical  and  lay  deputies  from  Virginia,  Georgia,  and 
Alabama,  and  clerical  deputies  alone  from  South 
Carolina  and  Mississippi.  On  the  second  day  one  lay 
deputy  from  South  Carolina  appeared.  Only  Virginia 
had  a  full  delegation;  South  Carolina  had  only  two 
clergymen  and  one  layman;  Alabama  the  same;  Mis- 
sissippi, one  clergyman;  Florida  had  no  representa- 
tive;   eighteen  deputies  in  all. 

The  Rev.  Charles  C.  Pinckney  was  chosen  President 
of  the  House  of  Deputies,  and  the  Rev.  John  M. 
Mitchell,  secretary.  The  Rev.  W.  H.  Harrison  was 
chosen  secretary  of  the  House  of  Bishops.     Resolutions 


250  THE    CHURCH 

were  passed  substituting  the  word  "United"  in  the 
place  of  "Confederate,"  in  the  Prayer  Book,  and  one 
or  two  other  resolutions  seeming  to  imply  the  possible 
continuance  of  one  or  more  Dioceses  in  a  condition 
of  separation;  and  the  two  houses  united  in  a  dignified 
and  manly  protest  against  military  interference  with 
the  rights  of  the  Church  in  Alabama,  where  General 
Thomas's  order  closing  the  churches  was  still  in  force. 

But  the  really  significant  and  important  action  by 
this  Council  was  contained  in  Resolutions  I  and  V,  of  a 
series  of  preambles  and  resolutions  adopted  jointly  by 
the  Bishops  and  Deputies,  as  follows: 

^'Resolved,  I.  That  in  the  judgment  of  this  Council 
it  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  good  faith  which  she 
owes  to  the  Bishops  and  Dioceses  with  which  she  has 
been  in  union  since  1862,  for  any  Diocese  to  decide  for 
herself  whether  she  shall  any  longer  be  in  union  with 
this  Council." 

V.  "  That  whenever  any  Diocese  shall  determine  to 
withdraw  from  this  Ecclesiastical  Confederation,  such 
withdrawal  shall  be  considered  as  duly  accomplished 
when  an  official  notice,  signed  by  the  Bishop  and 
Secretary  of  such  Diocese,  shall  have  been  given  to  the 
Bishops  of  the  Dioceses  remaining  in  connection  with 
this  Council." 

After  a  session  of  three  days  the  Council  adjourned 
sine  die,  and  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States 
had  ceased  to  be. 

The  dissolution  of  this  organization  was  the  direct 
result  of  the  Christian  love  and  courteous  consideration 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   251 

manifested  at  the  General  Convention  in  riiiladelphia. 
No  one,  after  that,  could  really  desire  to  perpetuate 
division.  In  the  preamble  to  the  joint  resolutions  of 
the  Council  at  Augusta,  it  is  recited: 

*' Whereas,  the  spirit  of  charity  which  prevailed  in 
the  proceedings  of  the  General  Convention  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States, 
at  its  late  session  in  Philadelphia,  has  warmly  com- 
mended itself  to  the  hearts  of  this  Council;  therefore. 
Resolved,''  etc.,  as  given  above.  And  in  every  Diocesan 
Council,  as  one  by  one  they  met,  and  took  the  necessary 
action  to  effect  their  reunion  with  the  Church  in  the 
United  States,  either  in  the  very  body  of  the  record 
of  the  change  made,  or  in  the  address  of  the  Bishop, 
or  report  of  the  committee  recommending  the  change 
in  the  relation  of  the  Diocese,  mention  is  made  of  the 
spirit  of  love  and  unity  manifested  at  the  General 
Convention,  in  such  a  way  that  it  is  plain  to  be  seen 
that  the  course  of  events  at  that  General  Convention 
was  the  determining  factor  in  the  problem  as  worked 
out  in  each  Diocese.  Well  may  it  be  claimed  for  those 
who  attended  from  the  South,  and  especially  for  the 
great-hearted  and  Catholic-minded  Bishop  of  North 
Carolina,  that  they  were  the  providential  instruments 
through  whom  reunion,  as  it  actually  came  about,  w^as 
accomplished.  To  Bishop  Atkinson,  more  than  to 
any  other  one  man,  we  owe,  under  God,  the  peace 
AND  UNITY  which  the  Church  entered  upon  and  enjoyed 
so  immediately  upon  the  close  of  the  great  War  between 
the  States. 


252  THE    CHURCH 

One  by  one  the  Southern  Dioceses  met  in  their 
Diocesan  Councils,  and  in  resolutions  setting  forth 
the  necessity  under  which  they  had  acted  in  making 
their  separate  organization  in  1861,  and  recognizing 
the  removal  of  that  necessity,  withdrew  from  their 
temporary  association,  and  renewed  their  connection 
with  the  Church  in  the  United  States.  And  Southern 
Churchmen  still  recall  with  pride,  and  with  humble 
gratitude  to  God,  the  history  of  that  brief  episode. 
As  their  fathers  repelled  the  name  and  the  thought  of 
schism,  in  connection  w^ith  that  Southern  Church,  so 
we  believe  that  the  true  story  of  their  conduct  does 
abundantly  show  that  they  were  fully  justified  in 
their  claim  to  have  preserved  throughout  its  brief 
existence  the  Catholic  Faith  and  the  Catholic  spirit. 
And  we  believe  that  the  page  which  records  the 
history  of  the  ''Church  in  the  Confederate  States**  is 
one  of  the  fairest  and  brightest  pages  in  the  history 
of  our  American  Church,  and  of  our  American 
Christianity. 

The  following  are  the  dates  on  which  the  Dioceses  of  "The 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States,"  not  represented  at  Philadel- 
phia, renewed  their  connection  with  the  Church  in  the  United 
States: 

The  Diocese  of  Georgia    January  3,  1866 

The  Diocese  of  Alabama    "  17, 

The  Diocese  of  South  Carolina February  16, 

The  Diocese  of  Florida "  22,     " 

The  Diocese  of  Mississippi May  9,     " 

The  Diocese  of  Virginia   "  16,     " 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   253 


STATEMENT   BY   BISHOP   ATKINSON   AND 
BISHOP  LAY 

The  following  letter  was  sent  to  leading  clergymen 
and  laymen  throughout  the  Southern  Dioceses,  and 
was  published  in  the  Church  papers,  upon  the  adjourn- 
ment of  the  General  Convention  of  1865. 

TO    OUR    BRETHREN    IN    THE    SOUTHERN    DIOCESES 

In  resuming  our  seats  in  the  General  Convention 
of  the  Church  in  the  United  States,  we  have  taken  a 
step  in  advance  of  those  with  whom  we  have  been 
for  some  years  associated.  We  were  aware  that  we 
ventured  much:  but  we  were  prepared  to  venture 
much  in  order  to  secure  the  reunion  of  the  Church, 
and  to  obviate  the  evils  which  were  likely  to  grow  up 
in  the  absence  of  frank  and  personal  conference. 

It  seems  proper  that  we  should  make  known  to  you 
what  has  happened  during  this  memorable  session. 

We  demanded  no  formal  guarantees:  the  assembled 
Bishops  offered  us  no  pledge  save  that  of  "their  honor 
and  their  love."  As  a  House  and  as  individuals  they 
welcomed  us  with  cordial  greeting. 

There  has  been  in  the  House  of  Bishops  a  careful 
avoidance  of  what  might  give  us  pain.  Painful  things 
were  sometimes  spoken,  but  even  then  the  speakers 
used  studied  moderation  and  self-restraint. 


254  THE    CHURCH 

The  results  arrived  at  are  as  follows: 

Bishop  Lay,  although  he  held  that  the  erection  of 
Arkansas  into  a  diocese,  and  his  election  as  diocesan, 
were  valid  acts,  preferred  to  waive  that  question. 
By  the  calamities  of  war  the  Church  in  that  State  has 
been  so  enfeebled  that  it  is  no  longer  able  to  exhibit 
an  organization.  He  therefore  answered  to  his  name, 
and  was  received  by  the  House,  as  Missionary  Bishop 
of  the  Southwest. 

In  the  matter  of  Bishop  Wilmer,  no  official  docu- 
ments were  before  the  Convention,  and  the  case  was 
complicated  by  an  unhappy  conflict  between  the  mili- 
tary and  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  in  the  State  of 
Alabama.  And  yet,  after  elaborate  discussion,  his 
consecration  was  ratified  on  conditions  not  liable  to 
objection,  unanimously  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and 
with  only  one  negative  vote  in  the  House  of  Deputies, 
which  vote  was  subsequently  withdrawn. 

The  Bishop-elect  of  Tennessee  was  accepted  with 
great  unanimity,  and  consecrated  without  delay  to 
his  high  office. 

In  celebrating  a  thanksgiving,  the  Convention 
abstained  from  disputed  topics,  and  confined  its  ex- 
pression of  gratitude  to  the  mercies  which  we  recognize 
in  common,  viz.,  peace  in  the  country  and  unity  in  the 
Church. 

In  devising  measures  to  provide  relief  for  sufferers 
in  the  South,  the  action  of  the  Church  was  marked  by 
sympathy  and  delicacy. 

In  establishing  a  system  for  the  instruction  of  the 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES     ^55 

frecdmen,  our  advice  was  soiiglit,  and  Episcopal 
authority  duly  respected. 

In  general,  while  the  Bishops  and  other  members 
of  the  Convention  have  in  no  wise  denied  or  concealed 
their  sentiments  on  the  questions  political  and  social 
brought  by  the  war  to  a  practical  solution,  they  have 
not  required  of  us  any  expression  of  opinion  on  these 
topics.  They  have  carefully  discriminated  between 
the  political  and  the  ecclesiastical  aspects  of  these 
questions,  and  have  confined  their  expressed  judgments 
and  their  action  to  the  latter.  They  are  content  with 
the  assurance  that  we  render  for  conscience'  sake, 
allegiance  honest  and  sincere,  to  the  Government  of 
the  United  States,  and  will  teach  others  so  to  do. 

We  see  nothing  now  to  hinder  the  renewal  of  the 
relations  formerly  existing  in  the  Church. 

We  feel  bound  to  acknowledge  that  we  have  been 
greatly  indebted  to  many  of  the  Bishops  for  the  warm 
fraternal  feeling  manifested  by  them,  and  for  their 
generous  exposure  of  themselves  to  censure  because 
of  their  efforts  to  promote  peace  and  unity;  nor  ought 
we  to  withold  our  conviction  that  the  great  body  of 
the  House  of  Deputies  have  deserved  well  of  the 
Church,  because  of  the  manliness  with  which  they 
have  encountered  reproach,  and  perhaps  subjected 
themselves  to  suffering,  in  the  cause  of  peace  and  holy 
moderation. 

In  conclusion,  we  desire  to  record  our  deep  conviction 
and  our  reverent  acknowledgement  that  the  results 
now  related  are  the  doing,  not  of  man  but  of  God. 


256  THE    CHURCH 

Our  profound  gratitude  is  due  to  Him  Who,  as  we  trust, 
in  this  perilous  juncture,  has  interposed  effectually  to 
heal  the  divisions  of  the  Church,  and  to  calm  the 
passions   which   threatened   to   rend   it   asunder. 

Thoimas  Atkinson, 
Bishop  of  North  Carolina. 
Henry  C.  Lay, 
Missionary  Bishop  of  the  Southwest. 
House  of  Bishops, 

Philadelphia,  October  20,  1865. 

House  of  Bishops, 
Philadelphia,  October  20,  1865. 

In  all  the  statements  and  conclusions  of  the  Bishops 
of  North  Carolina  and  the  Southwest  I  most  heartily 
concur;  and  with  them  desire  to  record  my  deep  con- 
viction that  the  results  related  are  the  doing,  not  of 
man  but  of  God. 

Charles  Todd  Quintard, 
Bishop  of  Tennessee. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES  257 


BISHOP    ATKINSON    AND    THE    CHURCH 
IN    THE    CONFEDERACY! 

The  third  Bishop  of  North  CaroHna  occupied  a 
somewhat  unique  position  among  our  Southern  Bishops 
in  his  attitude  towards  the  difficult  problems  presented 
to  the  Church,  both  at  the  beginning  and  at  the  close 
of  the  War  between  the  States.  His  position  was  not 
always  understood,  nor  did  his  course  at  the  time 
command  universal  approval.  But  it  was  his  power 
of  seeing  clearly,  and  of  reasoning  accurately,  amid 
the  clouds  and  clamor  of  those  perilous  times,  which, 
more  than  any  other  single  influence,  brought  the 
Church  in  peace  and  unity  and  unfeigned  charity 
through  trials  which  otherwise  might  have  split  it  into 
discordant  and  hostile  communions.  Having  truth 
with  him,  he  dared  to  seem  to  stand  alone;  and  all  the 
more  contentedly  and  patiently,  because  his  love  and 
confidence  towards  his  brethren  made  him  feel  sure  that 
the  truth  would  in  the  end  bring  all  together  again  in 
pursuit  of  their  great  and  holy  purpose. 

It  has  long  been  my  deliberate  judgment  that  in 
his  wonderful  combination  of  spiritual  elevation, 
moral    earnestness,    intellectual    power,    and    sound 

^  This  is,  in  substance,  an  address  delivered  at  the  laying  of  the 
corner-stone  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Comforter,  the  "  Atkinson 
Memorial,"  in  Charlotte,  N.  C. 
18 


258  THE    CHURCH 

judgment,  Bishop  Atkinson  was  the  greatest  man  I 
have  ever  known.  He  was  Hke  a  Httle  child  in  purity 
of  character,  in  perfect  sincerity  and  unaffectedness. 
He  did  not  condescend  to  the  lowly,  because  his  gener- 
ous love  and  genuine  sympathy  saw  all  men  on  the 
level  of  a  redeemed  humanity.  He  was  the  kindest  and 
most  charming  of  companions,  with  a  sweet  and  gentle 
humor,  which  insensibly  reconciled  and  harmonized 
the  possible  discordances  and  incongruities  of  the 
most  heterogeneous  gathering;  and  yet  there  was  ever 
about  him  an  atmosphere  of  unaffected  and  unconscious 
goodness  and  purity,  which  seemed  to  make  a  base 
thought  or  an  unlovely  word  unthinkable  and  un- 
speakable in  his  presence.  As  a  preacher  he  perfectly 
illustrated  that  definition  of  eloquence  which  makes 
it  consist  in  convincing  the  mind  and  moving  the  heart, 
rather  than  in  pleasing  the  taste;  which  makes  the 
hearer  say  to  himself,  "How  true,  and  how  just!" 
rather  than  "How  beautiful,"  or  "How  eloquent!" 
Absorbed  in  the  greatness  of  his  message,  and  in  the 
solemn  responsibility  of  delivering  it,  he  would  have 
scorned  the  artificial  graces  of  oratory,  if  he  had  thought 
at  all  about  them.  It  never  once  entered  his  mind 
that  he  was  preaching  an  eloquent  sermon.  I  have 
never  forgotten  the  impression  made  upon  me  when  I 
was  about  fourteen  years  old,  and  had,  with  a  familiarity 
which  his  affectionate  treatment  of  me  allowed,  re- 
peated to  him  what  a  rather  shallow  clergyman  had 
said  about  the  neglect  of  the  cultivation  of  oratory  by 
our  clergy,  as  compared  with  some  other  ministers. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATEB  259 

Up  to  that  time  I  had  lieard  Httle  preaching  exce])t 
that  of  my  own  father,  and  of  tlie  Bishop  himself;  and 
I  had  a  rather  high  opinion  of  the  quahty  of  preaching 
in  the  Church.  I  confidently  expected  to  hear  the 
Bishop  repel  the  suggestion  that  our  clergy  were  in 
any  respect  behind  those  of  our  Christian  brethren 
about  us.  He  looked  at  me  for  a  moment  in  silence, 
with  his  accustomed  expression  of  serious  benignity, 
and  then  said:  "My  son,  oratory  is  the  last  thing  I 
wish  to  see  my  clergy  cultivate."  I  did  not  understand 
him  then,  but  it  seems  to  me  now  a  speech  most  char- 
acteristic of  the  man,  and  of  the  preacher.  To  him 
the  great  things  in  preaching  were  so  very  great  and 
absorbing  that  he  never  got  down  to  the  level  of  a 
cultivated  and  conscious  oratory.  And  therein  lay 
his  excellence  as  a  speaker,  and  that  real  eloquence, 
w^here  power  of  thought  and  earnestness  of  purpose 
were,  by  the  heat  of  unaffected  love,  fused  into  a  living 
word,  which  went  straight  to  the  heart  and  mind  with 
the  irresistible  force  of  an  electric  shock.  To  me  he 
was  the  most  impressive  and  convincing  preacher  I 
have  ever  listened  to,  and  the  most  simple  and  unaf- 
fected in  his  method  and  in  his  manner. 

I  can  not  refrain  from  giving  here  tw^o  interesting 
experiences,  told  me  by  Bishop  Atkinson  himself, 
which  I  have  never  seen  in  print,  or  heard  from  others. 
His  first  charge  was  in  Norfolk,  his  second  in  Lynch- 
burg. He  had  been  born,  baptized,  and  brought  up 
in  the  Church,  as  had  his  ancestors  before  him.  He 
was  of  an  old  Virginia  Church  family,  though  several 


THE    CHURCH 

of  his  brothers  and  sisters  became  Presbyterians  early 
in  their  hfe.  In  his  youth  the  Church  in  Virginia,  as 
in  most  other  parts  of  the  country,  was  but  beginning 
to  learn  the  significance  and  the  value  of  her  own 
standards  of  doctrine  and  of  worship.  The  clergy  had 
been  so  few,  and  so  overburdened  with  the  care  of 
widely  scattered  congregations  and  individuals,  that 
they  had  not  been  able  to  put  into  use  the  devotional 
methods  of  the  Church;  and  many  of  her  holy  and  edi- 
fying services  had  been  neglected  and  forgotten.  But 
the  spirit  was  moving  upon  the  dry  bones,  and  clergy 
and  people  were  beginning  to  understand,  as  well  as 
to  love,  their  spiritual  mother,  and  more  and  more  to 
recover  their  lost  heritage,  lost  to  use,  but  preserved 
for  them  in  the  Prayer  Book. 

The  young  rector  at  Lynchburg,  in  his  diligent  study 
of  the  Prayer  Book,  observing  with  renewed  attention 
its  various  contents,  began  to  think  for  the  first  time 
about  the  Collects,  Epistles  and  Gospels  for  the  Saints' 
Days  and  other  minor  festivals.  He  had  never  seen 
them  used,  and  he  wondered  why  they  were  there,  in 
the  very  midst  of  the  book,  and  closely  associated  with 
those  in  common  use.  And  then  he  began  to  feel  that 
they  must  be  there  because  the  Church  intended  them 
for  use.  This  seemed  a  strange  and  startling  thought, 
but  he  could  see  no  other  explanation.  He  did  not 
lack  courage  to  act  alone,  but  he  had  modesty  and 
humility,  which  made  him  fear  to  set  himself  up  as  wiser 
or  better  than  his  brethren.  He  felt  that  he  must  seek 
counsel. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   2C1 

It  was  in  those  days  a  long  journey  from  Lynchburg 
to  Petersburg,  in  the  heavy  stage  coach,  or  by  private 
conveyance,  along  the  ill-made  and  worse-kept  roads 
of  mountain  and  of  low  country.  But  this  question 
had  to  be  settled;  and  so  he  took  that  journey  to  confer 
with  a  kindred  spirit,  the  Rev.  Nicholas  Cobbs,  rector 
of  St.  Paul's  Church,  and  afterwards  the  first  Bishop 
of  Alabama,  a  "Saint  of  the  Southern  Church,"  as  he 
has  justly  been  called.  It  came  out  in  their  conference 
that  the  same  thoughts  had  been  exercising  the  mind 
and  conscience  of  good  brother  Cobbs,  and  he  had 
come  to  the  same  conclusion.  So,  then  and  there, 
these  two  agreed  that  from  that  time  on  they  would 
endeavor  to  observe  the  days  and  seasons  of  the 
Church's  year,  as  they  are  set  forth  in  the  Prayer  Book. 
And  that,  Bishop  Atkinson  said  to  me,  was  the  begin- 
ning of  the  observance  of  these  minor  festivals  in 
Virginia,  so  far  as  he  knew  and  believed. 

The  second  experience  which  he  related  to  me  brings 
us  a  little  nearer  to  our  subject.  When  the  Diocese 
of  Indiana,  in  1843,  came  to  elect  its  first  Diocesan 
Bishop,  the  choice  fell  on  the  Rev.  Thomas  Atkinson, 
rector  of  St.  Peter's  Church,  Baltimore.  At  this  time 
he  had  been  only  seven  years  in  the  ministry,  and  had 
come  in  from  the  Bar,  without  the  advantage  of  a  course 
in  a  theological  seminary.  He  promptly  declined, 
his  Nolo  Episcopari  being  the  simple  expression  of  his 
sense  of  his  unpreparedness.  The  Diocese  of  Indiana 
then  chose  another  for  Bishop,  who  also  declined. 
Thereupon  Indiana  in  1846  again  called  him. 


262  THE    CHURCH 

This  second  election  seemed  to  carry  with  it  a  strong 
presumption  of  a  providential  call  to  that  work,  and 
his  mind  was  adjusting  itself  to  what  seemed  an  inevi- 
table duty,  when  he  received  a  letter  from  an  old 
Lynchburg  friend,  who  for  some  years  had  been  living 
in  Indiana.  This  friend  had  left  Virginia  because  his 
intense  dislike  of  slavery  had  made  him  unwilling  any 
longer  to  live  in  contact  with  it.  Bishop  Atkinson 
himself  had  a  strong  sense  of  the  disadvantages  and 
evils  of  slavery,  though  he  was  also  sensible  of  the  diffi- 
culty of  finding  any  just  and  practicable  means  of 
abolishing  it  in  the  South.  He  had  freed  all  his  own 
slaves  who  wished  to  be  freed  and  to  go  to  the  free 
States,  and  had  kept  only  those  who  voluntarily  chose 
to  remain  in  the  South.  His  old  friend  wTote  expressing 
the  pleasure  he  anticipated  in  seeing  him  Bishop  of 
Indiana,  and  begged  him  to  bring  his  family  to  his 
house,  and  to  make  that  house  his  home,  until  he 
should  have  leisure  to  make  his  permanent  arrange- 
ments. He  then  added,  that  the  Bishop  must  be  pre- 
pared to  live  and  work  in  a  community  where  the  feeling 
against  slavery  and  slave  owners  was  becoming  so 
inflamed  and  bitter,  that  the  writer  of  the  letter  as  a 
Southern  man,  though  opposed  to  slavery,  found  him- 
self in  a  painful  and  embarrassing  position. 

This  letter  caused  him  to  decline  for  a  second  time 
the  call  of  Indiana.  Little  as  he  was  attached  to  the 
institution  of  slavery,  and  thankful  as  he  could  have 
been  to  see  it  justly  and  peacefully  abolished,  he  felt 
quite  sure  that,  if  in  Indiana  his  friend  could  not  live 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   263 

in  comfort  on  account  of  the  state  of  j)u})lic  feeling, 
he  could  not  hope  to  be  happy  and  contented  in  his 
work,  since  he  would  probably,  as  time  went  on, 
find  himself  more  and  more  out  of  sympathy  with 
his  people  on  the  great  and  absorbing  question  of 
the  day. 

In  the  year  1853  the  Diocese  of  South  CaroHna  was 
to  elect  a  Bishop.  There  was  a  strong  feeling  in  favor 
of  electing  the  Rev.  Dr.  Atkinson.  But  rumors  had 
reached  that  State  as  to  his  feeling  about  slavery,  and 
prominent  persons  in  that  Diocese  communicated  with 
him,  asking  for  an  expression  of  his  views  on  the  subject. 
He  replied  promptly  in  effect  that  he  felt  slavery  to  be 
a  disadvantage,  though  he  could  not  see  how  to  get  rid 
of  it.  But  he  declared  that  if  it  came  to  a  choice 
between  slavery  and  the  Union,  he  should  say,  let 
slavery  go,  and  preserve  the  Union  of  the  States. 
That  is,  as  I  remember,  the  substance  of  his  reply. 
This  letter,  he  said,  prevented  his  being  elected  Bishop 
of  South  Carolina;  and  Bishop  Davis  was  chosen. 
My  old  friend  and  parishioner.  Gen.  Thomas  F.  Dray- 
ton, told  me  that  he  was  a  member  of  the  South  Carolina 
Diocesan  Convention  of  1853,  and  well  remembered 
the  letter  of  Bishop  Atkinson,  which  was  made  known 
to  the  members  of  the  Convention,  he  himself  having 
seen  and  read  it;  and,  he  said,  but  for  that  letter  Bishop 
Atkinson  would  certainly  have  been  their  choice  for 
Bishop. 

"So," Bishop  Atkinson  said  to  me,  "I  was  not  Bishop 
of  Indiana,  because  I  was  not  sufficiently  opposed  to 


264  THE    CHURCH 

slavery;  and  I  was  not  Bishop  of  South  Carolina, 
because  I  was  not  suflficiently  in  favor  of  it." 

And  that  is  an  example  of  how  he  went,  not  with 
one  party  or  with  the  other;  but  thought  his  own 
straight  clear  thought,  and  spoke  out  his  ovm  honest 
words,  and  acted  upon  his  own  solid  convictions; 
modest  and  quiet  and  gentle,  but  absolutely  fixed  and 
immovable  in  loyalty  to  his  conscience  and  to  his 
judgment. 

Bishop  Ives  left  the  Diocese  in  the  fall  of  1852.  In 
May,  1853,  Bishop  Atkinson  was  chosen  by  the  Diocesan 
Convention  to  be  his  successor,  and  was  consecrated 
October  17  following,  in  St.  John's  Chapel,  New  York. 

The  x^merican  Church  has  had  few,  if  any,  greater 
Bishops  than  Bishop  Atkinson,  in  all  the  qualities  of 
pure,  strong,  elevated,  refined,  and  consecrated  Chris- 
tian manhood;  and  it  has  had  no  Bishop  more  ad- 
mirably fitted  by  divine  providence  in  personal  gifts 
and  qualifications  for  the  peculiar  demands  of  the 
field  specially  committed  to  him. 

Bishop  Ives  had  begun  his  work  in  North  Carolina 
upon  the  old  High-Anglican  principles  of  Ravenscroft 
and  Hobart,  and  had  pow^erfully  quickened  and  popu- 
larized the  work  of  his  great  predecessor  in  the  Diocese. 
In  the  latter  years  of  his  administration  he  had  been 
led  astray  by  the  mediaeval  element  in  the  Oxford 
Movement,  as  so  many  of  the  English  clergy  were. 
In  the  hesitating  counsels  and  inconsistent  action  of 
Bishop  Ives's  later  years  the  Diocese  had  in  a  measure 
found  its  advantage,  for  never  did  so  able  a  man  exert 


IN    THE    CONFEDERATE    STATES       '265 

SO  little  influence  over  a  people  who  had  been  devoted 
to  him.  But  while  none  of  his  people  followed  him, 
there  was  very  great  danger  that  his  defection  would 
discredit  the  sound  principles  of  his  earlier  years,  and 
drive  the  Church  from  the  course  laid  out  for  it  by  the 
great  Ravenscroft.  It  was  so  easy  for  the  thoughtless 
and  ignorant  to  say:  "Such  were  the  principles  of  the 
Church;  and  see  the  result!"  And  personality  is  so 
much  stronger  than  reason  that  it  is  hard  to  meet  such 
a  form  of  attack. 

But  at  the  head  of  the  Diocese,  in  the  vacant  place, 
another  great  and  strong  personality  is  seen.  A  broader 
character  and  a  more  capacious  intelligence  than 
Ravenscroft 's,  yet  with  all  of  Ravenscroft's  immovable 
weight  of  principle  and  of  loyalty  to  the  Church;  a 
sounder  judgment,  a  more  accurate  discrimination,  a 
more  serene  and  lofty  spirit,  than  w^as  found  in  Ives, 
yet  wdth  a  logical  power,  a  moral  sincerity,  and  a  spirit- 
ual force  in  the  pulpit,  which  commanded  respect  and 
attention,  at  least  equal,  if  not  in  the  end  superior,  to 
the  best  effects  of  his  predecessors  best  oratory;  —  all 
this  made  the  third  Bishop  of  North  Carolina  a  man 
raised  up  by  God  for  the  emergency,  and  specially 
fitted  for  the  necessities  of  that  critical  time.  His 
very  appearance  inspired  confidence,  and  every  earnest 
and  loving  word  strengthened  the  effect  of  his  noble 
presence.  Never  had  a  Diocese  of  our  American 
Church  suffered  such  a  calamity  as  seemed  all  but  to 
overwhelm  us  in  the  defection  of  our  eloquent  and 
beloved  Bishop.     Yet  in  an  instant  perfect  confidence 


^ee  THE    CHURCH 

was  restored,  and  hope  revived,  and  the  Hfe  of  the 
Diocese  went  forward,  under  the  influence  of  a  calm, 
earnest,  clear-headed,  single-hearted  leader,  in  whom 
all  recognized  a  man  called  of  God  to  be  an  Apostle  in 
His  Church. 

And  so,  throughout  the  trials  and  perplexities  of 
war,  and  the  overturning  of  established  order,  and  the 
subversion  of  civil  and  ecclesiastical  institutions  and 
precedents,  we  find  in  him  the  same  unperturbed  spirit, 
the  same  serene,  unrufHed  temper,  the  same  clear 
thoughts,  the  same  loyalty  to  well-considered  principles, 
and  the  same  safe  and  solid  judgment.  In  the  crisis 
produced  by  the  secession  of  the  Southern  States  and 
the  outbreak  of  war,  violently  rending  the  country  in 
twain,  and  separating  the  Southern  Dioceses  from 
those  in  the  North,  he  seems  to  have  stood  alone  among 
the  Southern  Bishops  in  his  clear  and  accurate  views 
as  to  the  status  of  the  Dioceses  thus  actually  isolated. 
In  that  still  more  critical  moment,  after  the  war  was 
at  an  end,  he  again  stood  alone  in  the  policy  which 
guided  his  Diocese. 

The  view  of  the  other  Southern  Bishops  came  prac- 
tically to  this  —  that  the  secession  of  a  State  from  the 
Union  was  ipso  facto  the  separation  of  the  Diocese 
from  the  Church  in  the  United  States;  that,  having 
ceased  to  be  citizens  of  the  United  States,  they  could 
no  longer  as  individuals  or  as  Dioceses  be  connected 
with  the  Church  in  the  United  States,  but  were  at  once 
separated  from  it,  without  any  action  of  their  own, 
and  freed  from  the  obligations  of  its  Constitution  and 


IN    THE    CON  B^  ED  E  RATE    STATES      267 

Canons.  Bishop  Atkinson  denied  tliis.  While  grant- 
ing that  the  separation  produced  by  civil  and  pohtical 
action  might  justify,  and  even  require,  a  separate 
organization  for  the  Church  in  the  South,  he  maintained 
that  the  mere  action  of  the  States  could  have  no  effect 
whatever  ipso  facto  upon  the  unity  of  the  Church;  and 
consequently  that,  until  the  Southern  Dioceses  should 
as  such  take  action,  they  were  still  part  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States.  This 
position  he  put  forth  and  argued  with  great  force  in 
his  Convention  addresses,  at  Morgan  ton  in  1861,  and 
at  Chapel  Hill  in  1862. 

This  view  of  the  question  was  not  popular  in  the 
South.  Inflamed  with  all  the  passions  engendered  by 
civil  strife,  the  members  of  the  Church,  being  in  large 
proportion  leaders  of  public  sentiment,  and  identified 
with  the  Southern  cause,  chafed  at  the  idea  of  any 
connection  with  the  invading  enemy.  Bishop  Polk, 
of  Louisiana,  in  an  address  to  his  Diocese,  maintained 
in  its  fullest  extent  the  view  reprobated  by  Bishop 
Atkinson;  and  declared  that  by  the  secession  of  the 
State  of  Louisiana,  ipso  facto,  the  Diocese  of  Louisiana 
was  separated  from  the  Church  in  the  United  States, 
and  stood  isolated,  without  organic  connection  with 
any  other  Church  or  Diocese.  Bishop  Elliott,  of 
Georgia,  declared  that  by  the  secession  of  the  South- 
ern States  the  Southern  Bishops  had  ceased  to  be 
Bishops  of  the  United  States,  apparently  meaning 
that  by  necessary  inference  they  had  ceased  to 
be  Bishops  of  the  Church  in  the  United  States.     And 


268  THE    CHURCH 

this  seemed  to  be  the  general  attitude  of  the  Southern 
Bishops. 

As  the  state  of  the  country  did  in  fact  make  a  sepa- 
ration, and  a  cessation  of  all  ordinary  intercourse  and 
communication,  and  as  Bishop  Atkinson  recognized 
the  necessity  of  withdrawing  from  the  Church  in  the 
United  States,  and  forming  an  organization  contermi- 
nous with  the  bounds  of  the  Confederacy,  the  dis- 
tinction between  his  position  and  that  of  other  South- 
ern Bishops  may  seem  merely  doctrinaire.  But  it 
shows  how  carefully  and  clearly  he  thought  out  his 
position,  and  how  faithfully  he  stood  by  his  convictions. 
And  this  clear-sightedness  into  essential  principles 
gave  him  a  courage  in  action,  and  a  moral  weight 
which  was  of  vast  moment  in  the  end. 

In  the  meantime  his  view  was  proved  to  be  not  merely 
doctrinaire  by  two  occurrences  which  subjected  him 
for  the  time  to  serious  misrepresentation  and  distress. 
Some  time  in  1861,  after  North  Carolina  had  seceded, 
he  received  the  canonical  notice  of  the  election  of  the 
Rev.  Wm.  Bacon  Stevens,  as  Assistant  Bishop  of 
Pennsylvania.  As  the  Diocese  of  North  Carolina 
had  as  yet  taken  no  action  towards  changing  its  rela- 
tions with  the  Church  of  the  United  States,  he  felt  it 
to  be  his  duty  to  signify  to  the  Presiding  Bishop  his 
canonical  consent  to  this  election.  In  March,  1862, 
still  before  any  action  by  this  Diocese,  he  was  asked  to 
take  part  in  the  consecration  of  his  friend,  the  Rev. 
Richard  H.  Wilmer,  as  Bishop  of  Alabama.  Dr. 
Wilmer  could  not  be  consecrated  in  accordance  with 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   269 

the  Constitution  and  Canons  of  the  Church  in  the 
United  States;  and  the  proposed  Constitution  of  the 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States  had  not  yet  been 
ratified.  Bishop  Atkinson  thought  that  the  constitu- 
tionahty  and  reguhirity  of  the  transmission  of  the 
Episcopal  Commission  were  of  too  much  importance 
to  be  set  aside  merely  to  avoid  a  few  months'  delay. 
He  therefore  felt  obliged  to  decline  to  take  part  in  the 
consecration  of  a  Bishop,  which  he  regarded  as  un- 
authorized. 

These  two  cases,  first  his  concurrence  in  the  election 
and  consecration  of  a  Northern  Bishop,  and  then  his 
refusal  to  approve  or  to  participate  in  the  consecration 
of  a  Southern  Bishop,  gave  occasion  for  much  miscon- 
ception and  misrepresentation  of  his  position  and 
feelings,  and  were  a  cause  of  much  pain  and  annoyance 
to  him.  They  afford,  however,  another  example  of 
his  high  loyalty  to  his  convictions,  and  of  the  calm 
confidence  with  which  he  followed  the  conclusions  of 
his  judgment. 

During  the  continuance  of  the  war  Bishop  Atkinson 
pursued  diligently  the  round  of  his  administrative  and 
pastoral  duties,  visiting  his  parishes  and  missions, 
comforting  the  bereaved  and  afflicted,  preaching  in  the 
camps  to  the  soldiers,  and,  after  the  death  of  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Drane,  assuming  the  rectorship  of  St.  James's 
Church,  Wilmington,  in  addition  to  his  other  duties. 

I  wish  I  had  space  to  give  the  prayers  which  from 
time  to  time  he  put  forth  to  express  the  devout  hopes 
and  wants  of  his  people  under  their  sore  burdens.     In 


270  THE    CHURCH 

heart  and  mind  he  was  at  one  with  them  in  all  their 
trials,  sufferings,  aspirations,  hopes  and  sorrows.  And 
through  all  he  had  his  people  and  his  Diocese  with  him. 
They  appreciated  his  great  qualities,  and  common 
sufferings  increased  their  mutual  confidence  and  love. 
His  Diocese  and  his  Convention  felt  safe  in  taking  their 
stand  upon  the  ground  selected  by  their  leader. 

When  the  end  came  he  had  his  share  of  the  personal 
sufferings  and  outrage  with  which  the  invading  and 
now  victorious  enemy  emphasized  their  triumph.  His 
own  simple  account  is  most  characteristic.  Speaking 
of  the  approach  of  General  Sherman's  army  to  Wades- 
boro,  where  he  then  resided  with  his  family,  he  says: 
*'I  thought  it  right  to  remain  and  not  to  leave  my 
household  exposed  to  outrage,  and  without  any  pro- 
tection. I  supposed,  too,  that  my  age  and  office  would 
secure  me  against  outrage.  In  this  it  turned  out  that 
I  was  mistaken.  I  was  robbed  of  property  of  consider- 
able value,  and  that  it  might  be  accomplished  more 
speedily  and  completely,  a  pistol  was  held  at  my  head. 
While  I  do  not  affect  to  be  indifferent,  either  to  the 
outrage  or  to  the  loss  I  have  sustained,  I  felt  at  the 
time,  and  still  feel,  that  it  is  a  weighty  counterbalanc- 
ing consideration  that,  partaking  of  the  evils  which 
the  people  of  my  charge  have  been  called  upon  to 
undergo,  I  could  the  more  truly  and  deeply  sympa- 
thize with  them  in  their  sufferings."  I  have  been  told, 
I  can  not  be  sure  whether  by  the  Bishop  himself  or  by 
some  other,  that  when  the  soldier  held  his  cocked  pistol 
at  the  Bishop's  head,  and  commanded  him  to  give  him 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   271 

his  watch,  the  Bishop  cahnly  but  firmly  refused  to  do 
so.  The  ruffian  then  reached  down  from  his  horse  and 
seized  the  watch,  and  took  it  from  him.  He  offered  no 
resistance  —  to  have  done  so  would  have  been  both 
useless  and  unseemly  —  but  he  would  not  for  fear  give 
up  his  property  by  his  own  act.  He  could  be  robbed, 
but  he  could  not  be  intimidated. 

I  must  endeavor  very  briefly  to  summarize  the  events 
of  September  and  October,  1865;  when,  as  all  must 
now  confess,  Bishop  Atkinson  was  the  instrument  in 
God's  good  providence,  for  reuniting  the  divided 
Church,  and  so  healing  the  breach  that  not  even  a  scar 
remains  to  show  there  was  ever  a  wound.  This  was 
peculiarly  the  work  of  Bishop  Atkinson  and  of  his 
Diocese  under  his  guidance.  His  friend,  and  nephew 
by  marriage.  Bishop  Lay,  was  in  all  things  like-minded 
with  him  in  this  critical  period;  and  together  they 
represented  the  Southern  Church  at  the  General  Con- 
vention of  1865  in  Philadelphia.  But  Bishop  Lay  had 
no  Diocese  behind  him,  and  his  own  case,  with  that  of 
Bishop  Wilmer,  of  Alabama,  constituted  one  of  the 
problems  to  be  solved  in  order  to  effect  a  reunion.  He 
had  before  the  war  been  Missionary  Bishop  of  the 
Southwest.  During  the  war,  by  the  Church  in  the  Con- 
federate States,  he  had  been  made  Bishop  of  the  new 
Diocese  of  Arkansas.  He  did  not  therefore  occupy  an 
assured  position  for  mediating  between  the  two  parties. 

And  now  that  soundness  of  judgment  and  clear  view 
into  the  true  principles  of  Church  polity,  which  Bishop 
Atkinson  had  showed  in  1861,  became  manifest.     Of 


272  THE    CHURCH 

all  the  Southern  Bishops  he  was  the  least  embarrassed 
or  trammelled  by  the  results  of  the  war.  Those  who 
had  maintained,  in  theory  or  in  practice,  that  political 
separation,  ipso  facto,  produced,  nay,  effected,  ecclesias- 
tical division,  had  to  face  the  correlative  of  that  propo- 
sition —  namely,  that  the  restoration  of  civil  union 
necessitated,  if  it  did  not  ipso  facto  restore,  ecclesias- 
tical unity.  He,  on  the  contrary,  had  maintained, 
and  had  acted  upon  the  principle,  that  political  union 
or  disunion  did  not  of  itself  at  all  affect  the  Constitu- 
tion or  organization  of  the  Church.  Therefore,  when 
the  war  ended,  and  the  union  of  the  States  was  assured, 
his  position  was  no  ways  affected.  His  hands  were 
free  and  his  mind  also  was  free.  He  had  no  need  to 
struggle  to  reconstruct  his  principles,  or  to  cast  about 
how  he  might  save  the  remnants  from  the  wreck. 
Party  heat  had  not  affected  his  judgment  in  1861,  and 
he  came  to  the  consideration  of  the  situation  in  1865 
with  the  same  calm  mind  and  clear  vision.  He  said 
to  his  people,  in  effect:  The  war  is  over.  Bitter  as  is 
the  confession  —  we  have  failed,  and  all  the  States 
are  again  united  under  the  authority  of  the  Federal 
Government.  We  acted  for  the  best.  We  have  no 
regrets,  and  we  make  no  apologies.  We  formed  the 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States,  because  we  found  it 
necessary  to  do  so.  We  did  not  wait  to  ask  permission 
from  the  Dioceses  in  the  North.  The  emergency  was, 
and  is,  the  explanation  and  the  justification  of  our 
course.  Facing  the  present  situation,  and  feeling,  as 
we  did  in  1861,  that  we  have  the  right  to  act  freely. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   273 

and  are  not  controlled  or  constrained  by  the  course  of 
political  events,  we  find  that  the  interests  of  the  Church, 
and  consistency  with  our  own  principles  and  profes- 
sions, require  us  to  go  back  to  the  Church  in  the  United 
States.  We  believe  our  sister  Dioceses  will  follow  us, 
but  we  must  act  upon  our  own  convictions.  We  can 
not  wait  because  others  are  so  situated  that  they  can 
not  act  with  us  at  this  moment.  We  can  act  at  once, 
and  we  believe  it  is  for  the  interests  of  all  that  we  should 
act  at  once.  And  so  North  Carolina  showed  then,  as 
perhaps  she  has  at  other  times  shown,  that  she  can  be 
prompt  when  the  occasion  calls  for  it,  though  some- 
times she  is  slow. 

This  action  of  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of 
North  Carolina  was  the  critical  and  decisive  act  by 
which  the  happy  course  of  our  Church  history  after 
the  war  was  determined.  Bishop  Atkinson  could  not 
have  acted  the  part  he  did  act,  nor  would  his  action 
have  had  the  effect  which  it  did  have,  but  for  the  fact 
that  he  had  his  diocese  with  him  in  mind  and  heart, 
and  also  visibly  represented  in  the  House  of  Deputies, 
with  its  full  quota  of  able  and  distinguished  men  whose 
names  stood  for  something  in  Church  and  State.  Great 
as  he  was  in  himself,  it  showed  that  he  did  not  represent 
only  himself,  but  that  back  of  him  there  was  in  the 
Southern  Church  a  great  body  of  clergymen  and  lay- 
men, loyal  to  the  Church,  and  ready  to  face  bravely 
present  duty,  in  spite  of  the  past,  if  they  should  meet 
the  same  loyalty  and  magnanimity  in  the  Churchmen 
of  the  North. 
19 


274  THE    CHURCH 

And  who  shall  doubt  that  the  presence  of  Bishop 
Atkinson  and  Bishop  Lay  and  those  other  Southern 
Churchmen,  for  Tennessee  and  Texas  sent  also  partial 
delegations,  called  out  that  generous  spirit  with  which 
the  General  Convention  met  them! 

But  it  was  not  an  easy  thing  which  those  men  did 
who  went  to  Philadelphia  from  this  Diocese  in  October, 
1865.  They  went  with  anxious  hearts,  and  against 
the  judgment  of  some  of  our  best  men.  I  well  remem- 
ber how  my  uncle,  the  late  Governor  Clark,  of  Edge- 
combe, one  of  the  gentlest  and  most  generous  of  men, 
went  with  my  father  to  the  railway  station  the  morning 
he  was  leaving  for  Philadelphia,  and  begged  him  not  to 
go.  "At  least  wait,'*  he  said,  "until  the  other  Southern 
Dioceses  can  act  with  us."  And  in  Petersburg,  where 
my  father  stopped,  in  passing,  with  an  old  parishioner, 
the  rector  of  St.  Paul's  Church  called  on  him,  and  was 
politely  humorous  and  sarcastic  in  suggesting  the 
kind  of  reception  he  might  find  awaiting  him.  The 
way  of  the  peacemaker  is  not  always  peaceful  or 
pleasant.  Our  carnal  mind  loves  a  fight,  and  hates  to 
give  it  up. 

I  have  no  time  to  repeat  the  story  of  the  Con- 
vention of  1865,  of  how  nobly  and  beautifully  our 
brethren  of  the  North  responded  to  the  confidence 
shoTvTi  in  them  by  those  who  had  come  from  the  South 
to  this  meeting.  It  has  often  been  told,  and  by  none 
better  or  more  authoritatively  than  by  Bishop  Lay, 
in  his  admirable  memorial  sermon  preached  before  our 
Convention  of  1881  in  Christ  Church,  Raleigh. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   275 

There  again  came  forth  Bishop  Atkinson's  wonderful 
clarity  of  thought  and  accuracy  and  felicity  of  expres- 
sion. "A  word  spoken  in  season,  how  good  it  is!" 
That  Convention,  coming  at  the  end  of  a  great  war, 
had  to  thank  God  for  the  restoration  of  peace.  It  was 
a  necessity  of  the  situation.  And  they  were  Northern 
men;  and  most  of  them  believed  in  their  hearts  that 
slavery  had  been  a  national  disgrace  and  curse,  and 
that  secession  was  a  crime  against  the  life  of  the 
nation.  Whatever  we  may  think,  let  us  be  fair  minded 
and  generous  enough  to  see  just  how  they  looked  at  it. 
They  were  thankful  for  the  destruction  of  all  that 
system  of  labor  and  of  politics  which  had  gone  down 
in  the  issues  of  the  contest.  And  now  when  they  come 
to  have  their  thanksgiving  they  must  find  some  terms 
in  which  without  offense  they  may  ask  their  Southern 
brethren  to  join.  And  after  much  labor  and  travail, 
and  a  generous  effort  to  suppress  their  own  feelings,  in 
deference  to  their  Southern  brethren,  they  had  managed 
to  reduce  all  their  joy  and  triumph  to  a  simple  expres- 
sion of  thanksgiving  for  the  restoration  of  peace  and 
unity  under  the  restored  national  authority.  Could 
more  than  this  have  been  expected  from  ordinary 
mortals? 

And  then  the  great  and  good  Southern  Bishop,  whom 
many  of  them  loved  and  admired,  and  whom  one  of 
their  own  Dioceses  had  twice  elected  as  its  Bishop  — 
he  stood  up  and  said,  in  his  noble  and  gracious  but 
uncompromising  manner:  We  can  not  join  you  in  such 
a  thanksgiving,  but  we  can  join  you  in  thanking  God 


276  THE    CHURCH 

for  the  restoration  of  peace  to  the  country  and  unity  to 
the  Church. 

And  they  accepted  his  offer;  and  they  gave  thanks 
as  he  prescribed.  My  admiration  for  the  courage  and 
wisdom  and  grace  of  our  great  Bishop  is  almost  sur- 
passed by  my  gratitude  to  God  our  Father  for  the 
magnanimity  and  Christian  brotherhness  which  so 
nobly  responded  to  his  appeal.  And  was  ever  a  more 
eloquent  word  spoken  by  a  Bishop  of  the  American 
Church.? 

The  story  of  that  life,  and  of  all  that  it  meant  for 
North  Carolina  and  for  the  Church  at  large,  cannot  be 
even  summarized  here.  It  was  the  life  of  a  great, 
noble,  godly,  and  humble  spirit,  doing  its  work  faith- 
fully and  well  in  high  places  and  low.  Its  characteris- 
tic —  assuming  recognition  of  its  great  intellectual  and 
spiritual  gifts  —  was  poise y  balance,  sanity,  a  serene 
and  intrepid  yet  humble  confidence,  not  in  himself, 
but  in  the  Truth  upon  which  he  stood:  "As  the 
Lord  God  liveth  before  whom  I  stand,"  was  his 
thought  and  his  trust.  No  civil  strife  or  confusion, 
no  ecclesiastical  controversies,  no  religious  prejudices, 
seemed  able  to  obscure  his  vision  of  present  truth  and 
duty,  or  to  shake  him  in  his  steady  and  undeviating 
course. 

Though  constitutionally  conservative,  and  free 
from  all  desire  for  novelty,  and  to  a  great  extent 
unappreciative  of  the  attractiveness  of  much  which 
the  ritualistic  movement  has  added  to  the  services 
of  the  Church,  he   yet  refused  to  put  his  name  to 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES  277 

that  once  famous  ''Declaration''*  against  ritualism, 
signed  by  so  many  of  our  best  Bislioi)s,  but  now 
long  forgotten. 

It  is  difficult  to  point  out  any  error  of  judgment,  and 
absolutely  impossible,  I  believe,  to  find  any  fault  of 
temper,  in  all  his  long  life,  which  knew  so  many  trials 
and  diflficulties  and  vicissitudes  in  Church  and  in 
State.  It  is  easy  to  show  how  time  and  again  his 
word  was  the  sure  word  of  truth  and  wisdom,  and 
his  act  the  act  alw^ays  helpful,  and  sometimes 
decisive,  in  reaching  the  final  result  of  peace  and 
safety  and  love. 

As  I  think  of  him  unmoved  in  his  serene  clearness 
of  thought  and  purity  of  purpose  amid  all  civil 
discords  and  party  strife,  and  then  equally  calm, 
dignified,  unfearing,  while  the  ruffian  soldier  threat- 
ens his  life,  I  am  reminded  of  the  words  of  the 
Latin  poet: 

Just,  in  high  purpose  fixed,  this  man  nor  breath 

Malign  of  threatening  people,  nor  the  face 

Of  lawless  force,  from  his  firm  mind  may  shake.* 

And  then,  when  I  think  of  the  divine  faith  and  love 
w^hich  lay  underneath  all  this  firmness,  and  gave  beauty 
to  that  life,  and  w^as  in  him  an  unfailing  spring  of  in- 
ward peace  and  hope  and  refreshing,  those  familiar 

1  Justum  et  tenacem  propositi  virum 
Non  civium  ardor  prava  jubentium, 
Non  vultus  instantis  tyranni, 
Mente  quatit  solida. 

—  Horace,  Odes,  III.  3. 


278  THE    CHURCH 

English  lines  seem  to  suggest  themselves,  as  perfectly 
fulfilled  and  justified  in  his  life  and  character: 

Like  some  tall  clifiF  that  lifts  its  awful  form. 
Swells  from  the  vale  and  midway  leaves  the  storm. 
Though  round  its  breast  the  rolling  clouds  are  spread, 
Eternal  sunshine  settles  on  his  head. 

Much  more  might  be  said  in  just  and  proper  appre- 
ciation of  this  noble  character  and  saintly  life.  The 
pen  which  traces  these  lines  needs  to  be  restrained 
when  it  enters  upon  its  effort  —  alas,  how  inadequate ! 
—  to  portray  him  as  he  was.  Perhaps  the  words  on 
the  corner-stone  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Com- 
forter, the  "Atkinson  Memorial,"  in  Charlotte,  best 
represent  him  in  the  character  which  meant  most  to 
the  Church  at  large,  and  in  which  he  will  be  best  re- 
membered beyond  the  bounds  of  his  own  Diocese: 

Beati  Pacificiy  quoniam  filii  Dei  vocabuntur. 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   279 


SPECIAL  PRAYERS  SET  FORTH  FOR  USE 
BY  BISHOP  ATKINSON 

In  the  winter  of  1860-1. 

Almighty  God,  our  Heavenly  Father,  in  Whose  hands 
are  the  hearts  of  men  and  the  issues  of  events,  and 
Who  hast  graciously  promised  to  hear  the  prayers  of 
those  who,  in  an  humble  spirit,  and  with  true  faith, 
call  upon  Thee;  be  pleased,  we  beseech  Thee,  favorably 
to  look  upon  and  bless  the  Governor  of  this  Common- 
wealth, its  General  Assembly  now  in  session,  and  the 
people  over  whom  they  are  chosen  to  rule.  Possess 
their  minds  with  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  sound  under- 
standing, so  that,  in  these  days  of  trouble  and  perplex- 
ity, they  may  be  able  to  perceive  the  right  path,  and 
steadfastly  to  walk  therein.  So  enlighten,  direct  and 
strengthen  them,  we  pray  Thee,  that  they,  being 
hindered  neither  by  the  fear  of  man,  nor  by  the  love 
of  the  praise  of  men,  nor  by  malice,  nor  by  ambition, 
nor  by  any  other  evil  passion,  but  being  mindful  of 
Thy  constant  superintendence,  of  the  a^^ul  Majesty 
of  Thy  righteousness  and  of  the  strict  account  they 
must  hereafter  give  to  Thee,  may,  in  counsel,  word  and 
deed,  aim  supremely  at  the  fulfilment  of  their  duty, 
at  the  promotion  of  Thy  glory,  and  the  advancement 
of  the  welfare  of  our  country.     And  grant  that  the 


280  THE    CHURCH 

course  of  this  world  may  be  so  peaceably  ordered  by 
Thy  governance,  that  Thy  Church,  and  this  whole 
people,  may  joyfully  serve  Thee  in  all  godly  quietness, 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen. 


A  prayer  for  those  who  have  gone  forth  to  war  in  defence 
of  their  State  and  Country. 

O  Most  Gracious  Lord  God,  our  Heavenly  Father, 
we  commend  to  Thy  care  and  protection  Thy  servants, 
who  in  behalf  of  their  families  and  their  country  have 
gone  forth  to  meet  the  dangers  of  war.  Direct  and 
lead  them  in  safety;  bless  them  in  their  efforts  to 
protect  and  defend  this  land;  preserve  them  from  the 
violence  of  the  sword  and  from  sickness;  from  injurious 
accidents;  from  treachery  and  from  surprise;  from 
carelessness  of  duty,  from  confusion  and  fear;  from 
mutiny  and  disorder,  from  evil  living,  and  from  forget- 
fulness  of  Thee.  Enable  them  to  return  in  safety  and 
honor;  that  we  being  defended  from  those  who  would 
do  us  hurt,  may  rejoice  in  thy  mercies,  and  Thy  Church 
give  Thee  thanks  in  Peace  and  Truth,  through  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord.     Amen. 


A  Prayer  for  the  People  of  the  Confederate  States. 

O  Lord,  our  God,  Who  rulest  over  all  the  Hosts  of 
Heaven,  and  over  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  Thou 
hast  power  to  cast  down,  or  to  raise  up  whomsoever 
Thou  wilt,  and  to  save  by  many  or  by  few;  and  we 
now  come  to  Thee  to  help  and  defend  us  in  this  time 


IN  THE  CONFEDERATE  STATES   281 

of  danger  and  necessity.  Wc  acknowledge  and  lament, 
O  God,  the  many  grievous  sins,  by  which  we  have 
justly  provoked  Thy  wrath  and  indignation,  and  wert 
Thou  extreme  to  mark  iniquities,  O  Lord,  we  could  not 
abide  it.  But  it  is  Thy  nature  and  property  ever  to 
have  mercy  and  to  forgive;  and  we  beseech  Thee  now 
to  extend  to  us  Thine  accustomed  mercy,  and  to  deliver 
us  from  the  evils  and  dangers  to  which  we  are  exposed. 
Do  Thou,  O  Lord,  remove  from  our  borders  all  invad- 
ing armies;  confound  the  devices  of  such  as  would  do 
us  hurt,  and  send  us  speedily  a  just  and  honorable  and 
lasting  peace.  And  above  every  earthly  blessing  give 
us,  as  a  people,  grace  to  know,  and  love,  and  serve  Thee, 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen. 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Abolition  Societies  and  Peti- 
tions, 111. 

Addison,  Rev.  Thomas  G.,  181. 

Alabama,  Diocese  of,  20,  43,  49, 
54,  55,  80,  138,  142,  150, 
183  et  seq.,  249,  252. 

Alexandria,  Va.,  clergy  of,  172 
et  seq. 

Andrews,  Rev.  Dr.  Charles  W., 
108. 

Arkansas,  Diocese  of,  54,  55, 
204,  243. 

Army,  Confederate,  69  et  seq. 

of  Northern  Va.,  69  et  seq., 

89. 

of  Tennessee,  47,  80,  84. 

Arthur,  Rev.  Thos.  S.,  80. 

Atkinson,  Rt.  Rev.  Thomas, 
Bishop  of  North  Carolina,  7, 
28  et  seq.,  50  et  seq.,  131  et  seq., 
214  et  seq.,  239  et  seq.,  257  et 
seq.  et  passim. 
Augusta,  Ga.,  "General  Coun- 
cils" at,  in  1862,  55  et  seq.; 
of  1865,  249  et  seq. 

B 

Baptisms,  by  Bishop  Polk,  47. 
Baptist   Association   of   Georgia, 
on  Marriage  of  Slaves,  118. 


Barnard,  Rev.  Frederick  A.  P., 

35. 
Barnwell,  Rev.  Robert  W.,  80. 
Battle,    Hon.    William   H.,   139, 

210,  note,  223,  225. 

Kemp  P.,  225,  241  note. 

Beckwith,    Rt.    Rev.    John    W. 

[later  Bishop  of  Georgia],  79. 
Bedell,    Rt.    Rev.    Gregory    T., 

Bishop  of  Ohio,  6  note,  181. 
Bishops,   House  of.   Question   of 

opening  its  sessions,  136. 
Blackstone,  Sir  William,  112  note. 
Blount,     Surgeon     AVilliam     A., 

161  and  note. 
Boone,    Rt.    Rev.    William    J., 

Bishop  of  China,  32,  59. 
Bragg,  General  Braxton,  84,  85. 
Brand,    Rev.    William    F.,    243 

note. 
Brown,  Colonel  H.  Allen,  87. 
Burgess,  Rt.  Rev.  George,  Bishop 

of  Maine,  244  et  seq. 
Butler,    General    Benj.    F.,    174, 

175. 


Canons  of  the  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States,  42,  45. 

Carmichael,  Rev.  James,  164. 

Chaplains  in  the  Confederate 
Army,  78  et  seq. 


285 


286 


INDEX 


Chaplains,  List  of,  103  et  seq. 

Cheshire,  Rev.  Joseph  Blount, 
102,  223,  224,  274. 

Christ  in  the  Camp,  77,  79  note. 

Church  Intelligencer,  The,  94  et 
seq.  et  passim. 

Clark,  Hon.  Henry  T.,  274. 

Clayton,  Colonel  Powell,  172. 

Clergy  of  the  South,  their  neces- 
sities, 146  et  seq. 

,    their    special    diflBculties, 

169  et  seq.  ' 

Cobbs,  Rt.  Rev.  Nicholas  H., 
Bishop  of  Alabama,  5,  7,  261. 

Collins,  Josiah,  128. 

Columbia,  S.  C,  Meeting  at,  39 
et  seq.,  49. 

"Confederate  Prayer  Book,"  98 
et  seq. 

Constitution  of  the  Confederate 
States,  159. 

of  the  Church  in  the  Con- 
federate States,  36,  39  et  seq., 
51,  54,  64. 


Daves,  Major  Graham,  89  note. 
Davis,  Hon.  Jefferson,  President 

of  the  Confederate  States,  159. 
• ,     Rt.    Rev.     Thomas     F., 

Bishop   of   South    Carolina,  7, 

12,  21  et  seq.,  123,  137,  231  et 

seq.  et  passim. 

,  Rev.  Thomas  F.,  Jr.,   142. 

Deaconesses,  Order  of,  150. 
De  Fontaine,  F.  G.,  165  note. 
De  Rosset,  Dr.  Armand  J.,  102. 
,    Colonel    William    L.,    85 

note. 


Drayton,    General    Thomas    F., 

263. 
DuBose,  Rev.  McNeely,  101. 

E 

Elliott,  Rt.  Rev.  Stephen,  Bishop 
of  Georgia,  5,  7,  18,  20,  35, 
55,  63,  136,  211  et  seq.  et 
passim. 

England,  Church  of.  Influence  in 
abolishing  slavery,  112. 

Episcopal  Recorder,  210  note. 

Everhart,  Rev.  George  M.,  93, 
97. 

Ewell,  General  Richard  E.,  71 
note. 

Eyre  &  Spottiswoode,  100,  102. 


Fast  Days,  10,  153,  159. 
"Faunsdale  Plantation,"   127. 
Fitzgerald,    Rev.    Frederick,    73, 

95. 
Florida,  Diocese  of,  21,  54,  56, 

217,  252. 
Fulton,  Rev.  John,  3,  49  note,  63, 

174,  186,  190. 


Gadsden,    Rev.    Christopher    P., 

12. 
Gaston,  Hon.  William,  110. 
General     Convention,     of     1859, 

5,  95,  121;  of  1862,  205,  209; 

of    1865,     189,    203,    209    and 

note,  239  et  seq. 
Georgia,   Diocese   of,  21,  54,  80, 

145,  210  et  seq.,  249,  252. 


INDEX 


287 


Gibson,  Rev.  Churchill  J.,  53. 
Glenn,  Captain  Chalmers,  131. 
Glcnnic,   Rev.  Alexander,   123   ct 

seq. 
Goodrich,  Rev.  Charles,  174. 
Goolsby,  John,  130. 
Graham,    Hon.    William   A.,  210 

note. 
Gray,    Rev.    William    C.    [later 

Bishop    of    Southern    Florida], 

79. 
Green,  Rev.  Henry  F.,  95. 
,  Rt.  Rev.  Wm.  M.,  Bishop 

of  Mississippi,  5,  7,  55,  125  et 

seq.,   136,    142,   146,    154,   167, 

171,  216. 
Gregg,      Rt.      Rev.      Alexander, 

Bishop  of  Texas,  3,  6  note,  7, 

11,  12,  17,  125,  144,  150  note, 

182,  214  note. 

H 

Hairston,  Major  Peter  W.,  130. 
Hale,  Edward  J.,  224. 
Hanckle,  Rev.  Christopher,  5Q. 
Hardee,  General  William  J.,  47, 

85,  92. 
Harris,  Rev.  G.  C,  172 

Harrison,    Mrs.    ,    127. 

,  Rev.  W'illiam  H.  5Q,  249. 

Hines,  Rev.  Richard,  41. 
Hodges,  Rev.  William,  223,  224. 
Hoge,  Rev.  Moses  D.,  149. 
Hood,   General  John  B.,  47,  81, 

82,  85,  92. 
Hopkins,  Rt.  Rev.  John  Henry, 

Bishop  of  Vermont,  203,  206, 

208,  211,  2:59,  245. 
,  Rev.  John  Henry,  Jr.,  239. 


Hospitals,  160  et  seq.,  164. 

"Call  to  the,"  a  poem,  165. 

Female,  Aid  Society,  162. 

Hubbard,  Rev.  Fordyce  M.,  97, 

224,  242. 
Hunt,  Hon.  W^ashington,  247. 
Huske,  Rev.  Joseph  C,  102. 
Hymnody,  142  et  seq. 

I 

Indiana,  Diocese  of,  261. 

Intrusions,  180  et  seq. 

Ives,     Rt.     Rev.     L.     Silliman, 

Bishop  of  North  Carolina,  234, 

264. 


Jackson,    "Stonewall,"    71    note, 

72,  75,  77,  78,  88  et  seq. 
Jefferson,      Thomas,      denounces 

slavery,  108. 
Johns,  Rt.  Rev.  John,  Bishop  of 

Virginia,  7,  28,  52,  53,  78,  99, 

181,    198   et   seq.,    207,    226   et 

seq. 
Johnson,    Andrew,    President    of 

the  United  States,  189. 
Johnston,  General  Joseph  E.,  47, 

82,  85,  92. 
Jones,   Rev.   J.   William,   77,   79 

note. 
Jones,   Rev.   Lucius  H.,   90  and 

note. 

L 

Lay,  Rt.  Rev.  Henry  C,  Bishop 
of  Arkansas,  5,  6  note,  7,  25 
et  seq.,  80  et  seq.,  137,  142,  150 
note,  163,  175  et  seq.,  177  note. 


288 


INDEX 


215,  245  et  seq.,  253,  et  seq.   et 

passim. 
Lee,  General  Robert  E.,  53,  75 

et    seq.,     78,     89,     110,      181, 

202. 
Louisiana,  Diocese  of,  20,  35,  39, 

46. 

not  in  Church  in  Confed- 
erate States,  54,  56,  217. 

M 

Macfarlane  &  Furgusson,  99. 
Magruder,  General  John  B.,  86. 
Marriage   among   slaves,    117    et 

seq.,  119  note,  124. 
Mason,    Rev.    Richard    S.,   102, 

139,  223,  224. 
"Matt"  a  slave,  131. 
Maynard,  R.  J.  &  Co.,  98. 
McConnell,  Rev.  Samuel  D.,  191 

note. 
McCook,      General      [Alexander 

McD.],  172. 
McCrady,  Edward,  139. 
McIIvaine,    Rt.  Rev.  Charles  P., 

Bishop  of  Ohio,  181. 
McKim,  Rev.  Randolph  H.,  74. 
Meade,  Rt.  Rev.  William,  Bishop 

of  Virginia,  7,  28,  39,  44,  52  et 

seq.,  73,  109,  110,  197. 

his  position  as  to  slavery, 

110. 

Meredith,  Rev.  William  C,  86. 
Military  Orders  closing  churches 

in  Alabama,  186  d  seq.,  244. 
Miller,   Rev.   Benjamin   M.,   162 

et  seq. 
Missions,  Foreign  and  Domestic, 

36,  43,  58,  59  et  seq. 


Mississippi,  Diocese  of,  35,  54, 
55,  80,  125,  210,  249,  252. 

Mitchell,  General  Ormsby  McK., 
175  et  seq. 

Rev.     John     M.,     35,     56, 

249. 

Montgomery,  Ala.,  17  note,  19, 

28,  35  et  seq.,  39. 
Moral  Conditions  in  the  South  as 

affected  by  the  war,  159. 
Mott,  Rev.   Thomas  S.  W.,  95, 

97. 

N 

Name  of  the  Church,  Proposed 
Change  of,  41  and  note,  136. 

Negroes,  Church  Work  for,  43, 
59,  61,  120  et  seq. 

,  many  manumitted  in  Vir- 
ginia, 108. 

New  Orleans,  clergy  of,  173. 

New  York,  Diocesan  Convention 
of,  236  et  seq. 

Daily  News,  187  note. 

Niles,    Rt.    Rev.     William    W., 

Bishop  of  New  Hampshire,  98 

note. 
Noll,  Rev.  Arthur  H.,  84. 
North  Carolina,  Diocese   of,  28, 

54,    79,    80,    217,    223    et   seq., 

235,  264  et  seq.,  268,  272. 


Oath  of  Allegiance,  179,  184. 
Odenheimer,    Rt.    Rev.   William 

H.,    Bishop  of  New  Jersey,  6 

note,  246. 
Osborne,  Rev.  Edwin  A.,  70  and 

note. 


INDEX 


289 


Otey,  Rt.  Rev.  James  Harvey, 
Bishop  of  Tennessee,  5,  7,  9, 
10,  41,  50,  136;  his  death,  217 
note. 

P 

Packard,  Rev.  Joseph,  76. 

,  Joseph  [Jr.],  77  and  note. 

Page,  Mrs.  Anne  R.,  108. 

Papers,  Church,  94,  96,  210  note, 
et  passim. 

Parker,  Rev.  John  Haywood, 
111  and  note. 

Pastoral  Letters,  10,  13,  14,  16, 
60  et  seq.,  144,  154,  162,  184, 
187,  207,  231  et  seq. 

Patterson,  Rev.  George,  87  et 
seq.,  129  and   note. 

Payner,  Rev.  John,  Missionary 
Bishop  at  Cape  Palmas,  32,  59. 

Peake,  Rev.  [E.  Steele.?],  180. 

Pendleton,  Rev.  Wm.  N.,  77,  151. 

Perkins,  Rev.  Edward  T.,  86. 

Perry,  Rt.  Rev.  William  Stevens, 
Bishop  of  Iowa,  his  History  of 
the  American  Episcopal  Church, 
3,  49  note,  63. 

Phelan,  Hon.  John  D.,  139. 

Philadelphia,  241.  General  Con- 
vention at,  1865,  239  et  seq., 
251. 

Pinckney,  Rev.  Charles   C,  249. 

Pittman,  Dr.  N.  J.,  161  and  note. 

Polk,  Rt.  Rev.  Leonidas,  Bishop 
of  Louisiana,  5,  7,  11,  13,  14 
et  seq.,  17  et  seq.,  46  et  seq.,  92, 
et  passim;  his  death,  47,  92. 

Porter,  Rev.  A.  Toomer,  80. 

Potter,  Rt.  Rev.  Horatio,  Bishop 
of  New  York,  236,  240,  243. 


Praemunire,^  statutes  of,  22. 
"Prayers,  for  Civil    Rulers,    12    et 

seq.,  140  note,  169  et  seq.,  184 

et  seq.,  192  et  seq. 
special,  10   et  seq.,   164,   279 

et  seq. 
Prayer  Book,  27,  56  et  seq.,  65, 

98,  138  et  seq.,  250. 
,   the   "Proposed   Book,"   of 

1785,  193. 
,  the  "Array  and  Navy,"  91, 

99. 
,  "The  Confederate,"  99  et 

seq. 
Presbyterian     Southern    on    mar- 
riage of  slaves,  118. 
"Protestant     Episcopal     Church 

Female    Bible,    Prayer     Book 

and  Tract  Society,"  91. 
" Publishing    Association," 

93,  97. 
Provincial  System,  40,  137. 
Psalmody,  142. 

Q 

Quintard,  Rt.  Rev.  Chas.  T., 
Bishop  of  Tennessee,  47,  79, 
82,  83  et  seq.,  92,  105,  237,  254, 
256. 

^  It  being  too  late  to  alter  the 
text  at  page  22,  the  writer  would 
state  here  that  the  statutes  of 
Praemunire  are  referred  to,  as 
they  are  popularly  understood, 
following  Blackstone's  interpreta- 
tion. Modern  historians  interpret 
them  somewhat  differently. 

J.   B.  C. 


290 


INDEX 


R 

Randolph,  Rt.  Rev.  Alfred  M. 
[later  Bishop  of  Southern  Vir- 
ginia], 79,  86,  164. 

,  J.  W.,  100,  101. 

Ravenscroft,  Rt.  Rev.  John  Stark, 
Bishop  of  North  Carolina,  234, 
264. 

Richmond,  General  Convention 
of  1859,  5,  95. 

Sentinel,  148. 

Whig,  131. 

"Robert    E.  Lee,    The,''  Blockade 

Runner,  101. 
Ruffin,  Hon.  Thomas,  210  note. 
Rutledge,   Rt.   Rev.  Francis  H., 

Bishop  of  Florida,  5,  7,  12,  14, 

35. 

S 
Sass,     Jacob     K.,     36,     43,     60, 

92. 
Savannah,       Roman       Catholic 

Bishop    of,    on    the    marriage 

of  slaves,  119. 
Scarcity  and  want  in  the  South, 

147  et  seq.,  160. 
Schism,   Southern    Church    not 

liable  to  the  charge  of,  204  et 

seq.,  218  et  seq. 
Secession,  dates  of,   in   the  sev- 
eral States,  37. 
,  effect  upon  status  of  the 

Southern  Dioceses,  14  et  seq. 

19  etseq.,  29  et  seq.,  266  et  seq. 
Seymour,   Hon.  Thomas  H.,   of 

Connecticut,  209  note. 
Shepley,     General    George    F., 

174. 


Sherman,    General  William    T., 

177  note. 
Shipp,  Hon.  William  M.,  223. 
Sick  and  wounded,  care  of,  160 

et  seq. 
Slavery  in  the  South,  106  et  seq. 
,  effect  of  Christianity  upon, 

111  d  seq. 
Smedes,  Rev.  Aldert,  95  note. 
Smith,    Rev.    James    Power,    71 

note. 

,  Richard  H.,  223,  225. 

,  Sir  Thomas,  112  note. 

South  Carolina,   Diocese  of,   19, 

35,    80,    140  note,     249,    252, 

263  et  seq. 
,  work  among  the  slaves,  121 

et  seq. 
Southern  Churchman,  the,  96. 

Episcopalian,  the,  96. 

Sparrow,  Rev.  William,  139. 
Stevens,   Rt.   Rev.   Wm.   Bacon, 

Bishop    of    Pennsylvania,    35, 

49,  51,  247,  268. 
Stewart,  Rev.  Kensey  J.,  172  et 

seq. 

Stickney,  Mrs.  ,  127. 

Strange,  Rt.  Rev.  Robert,  Bishop 

of  East  Carolina,  86  note. 

,  Colonel  Robert,  225. 

Stuart,  General  J.  E.  B.,  75. 
Sutton,  Rev.  Robert  B.,  102. 
Swain,  Hon.  David  L.,  210  note. 


Tennessee,  Diocese  of,  39,  55, 
80,  241,  274. 

,  not  in  "Church  in  the  Con- 
federate States,"  54  et  seq.,  217. 


INDEX 


201 


Texas,  Diocese  of,  20,  54,  80,  183, 
214,  216,  231  note,  230,  241, 
274. 

Thomas,  General  George  II.,  18C, 
201. 

Trapier,  Rev.  Paul,  124,  139. 

Trescott,  Henry,  36,  43,  59. 

Trimble,  Rev.  Robert  \V.,  172. 


"Union  Men' 
1860,  8. 


U 
in  the  South  in 


Vail,  Rt.  Rev.  Thomas  H.,  Bishop 
of  Kansas,  55. 

Vance,  Hon.  Zebulon  B.,  210  note. 

Villeins,  Regardant  and  in  Gross^ 
112  and  note. 

Virginia,  Diocese  of,  28,  54,  55, 
77,  79,  80,  152,  197,  226  et  seq., 
249,  252. 

,  Diocesan  Missionary  Soci- 
ety, 91,  99. 

,  movement  to  abolish  sla- 
very, 109. 

W 

Waccamaw,  S.  C.,  All  Saints' 
Parish,  work  among  the  slaves, 
122,  123  et  seq. 


Washington,  George,  107,  103. 
Watson,    Rev.    Alfred    A.    [later 
Bishop  of  P'ast  Carolina],  79, 
85  et  seq.,  170,  222  et  seq. 

Weller,  Rev.  M.  Leander,  90. 

Welsh,  John  and  William,  242. 

Wesley s,  the,  and  George  ^^'hite- 
field,  5. 

Wetmore,  Rev.  William  R.,  170. 

Whipple,  Rt.  Rev.  Henry  B., 
Bishop  of  Minnesota,  6  note. 

Wilkes,  John,  93,  97,  102. 

Wilmer,  Rt.  Rev.  Richard  H., 
Bishop  of  Alabama,  43,  45,  49 
ct  seq.,  94,  141,  150,  178,  208  et 
passim. 

,  his  consecration,  49   et  seq. 

et  passim 

,   his  troubles  in   1865,    183 

et  seq. 

Wingfield,  Rt.  Rev.  John  H.  D. 
[later  Bishop  of  Northern  Cali- 
fornia], 174  et  seq. 

Woods,  General  William  B.,  186, 
187. 

Wynne,  Charles  H.,  99. 


Yerger,  Colonel  George  S.,  126. 


DATE  DUE 

GLX  MAY  3  1  19^5 

GURec  I 

m  2  3J99 

5 

:        :'SJH(ti 

^    ^*^p  '.:  <: 

Pnr.ied 
in  USA 

937.7^ 


C^24 


BRITTLE  DO  NCfl/ 
PHOTOCOPY^ 


